DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statements (IDSs) submitted on 06/30/2025 and 09/17/2026 are in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statements are being considered by the examiner.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 1-2, 8, 10, 13 and 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Mao et al., (CN 113359112 A) referred to as MAO hereinafter.
Regarding Claim 1, MAO shows a Light Detection and Ranging (LiDAR) assembly (Abstract), comprising:
a transmitter configured to emit first laser light along a first direction (Contents of the Invention; FIG. 2; description of laser 103 and beam L1);
a first scanner, wherein an input terminal of the first scanner faces to an output terminal of the transmitter (FIG. 2; description of laser 103, liquid crystal phased array 101, and scanner 102), and the first scanner is configured to control the first laser light to be deflected from the first direction to a plurality of different first deflection directions, and emit the first laser light along the plurality of first deflection directions to a target object (FIG. 2; description of beam L3 and detection spot);
wherein at least one of the plurality of first deflection directions is different from the first direction (FIG. 1A; FIG. 2; discussion of beams L1 and L2);
a receiver configured to receive laser light reflected by the target object and convert an optical signal into an electrical signal (FIG. 2; description of echo beam L4 and detector 104);
and a signal processing unit configured to receive the electrical signal, analyze and compute the electrical signal to obtain information about a distance from the target object and a shape of the target object (Contents of the Invention section discloses a detector.).
Regarding claim 2, MAO shows the limitations as per Claim 1 above, wherein an angle between the at least one of the plurality of first deflection directions and the first direction ranges from 0.5° to 10° (End of Contents of the Invention describes angles of several degrees, which according to commonly held definitions is explicitly well within the claimed range.).
Regarding claim 8, MAO shows the limitations as per Claim 1 above, further comprising a transmitting optical component (FIG. 2; discussion of optical component 100 and collimating lens);
wherein an input terminal of the transmitting optical component faces to an output terminal of the first scanner (FIG. 2, components are arranged sequentially in the optical path.);
and the first laser light along the plurality of first deflection directions is emitted to the target object via the transmitting optical component (FIG. 2; beam L3).
Regarding claim 10, MAO shows the limitations as per Claim 1 above, further comprising a second scanner (FIG. 2; receiving operation);
wherein the second scanner is configured to control second laser light to be deflected from a plurality of different second deflection directions to a second direction , to allow the second laser light along the second direction to be transmitted to the receiver (FIG. 2; receiving operation);
and the second laser light is light reflected by the target object for the first laser light (FIG. 2; description of echo beam L4), and at least one of the plurality of second deflection directions is different from the second direction (FIG. 2; receiving operation).
Regarding claim 13, MAO shows the limitations as per Claim 10 above, further comprising a receiving optical component between the second scanner and the target object (FIG. 2; receiving operation);
wherein the second laser light reflected by the target object is transmitted to the second scanner via the receiving optical component (FIG. 2; Echo beam L4 travels from the target object toward scanner 102).
Regarding claim 20, MAO shows the limitations as per Claim 1 above, an apparatus with a detection function (Abstract, Technical Field and Contents of the Invention all disclose this.), comprising the LiDAR assembly according claim 1 (See Claim 1 above).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claim(s) 3, 4, 11, 14, 17 and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over MAO in view of Xiong et al., (CN 114488078 A) referred to as XIONG hereinafter.
Regarding claim 3, MAO shows the limitations as per Claim 1 above, however failing to but XIONG does specifically show wherein the first scanner comprises:
a first optical element facing to the output terminal of the transmitter, and configured to convert a polarization state of the first laser light from a linear polarization state to a circular polarization state (FIG. 4; Specific Implementation Examples; S10; quarter-wave plate 1), or convert a polarization state of the first laser light from a circular polarization state to a linear polarization state (FIG. 4; Specific Implementation Examples);
a second optical element disposed on a side of the first optical element facing away from the transmitter, and configured to deflect the first laser light from the first direction to the plurality of first deflection directions (FIG. 4; FIG. 7; active liquid crystal polarization grating module 3);
and a third optical element disposed between the first optical element and the second optical element (FIG. 4; FIG. 7; switchable liquid crystal half-wave plate 2), and configured to change or maintain the polarization state of the first laser light (S30; S303–S307; FIG. 6).
Both MAO and XIONG are analogous to that of the claimed invention in that they all lie within the same field of endeavor.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one possessing ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify MAO in the spirit of XIONG because it involves switching angles in order to avoid time waste introduced by liquid crystal scanning (Contents of the Invention).
Regarding claim 4, MAO shows the limitations as per Claim 3 above, wherein the third optical element comprises:
a first substrate (FIG. 1A; liquid crystal phased-array structure);
a first transparent electrode layer on a side of the first substrate (FIG. 1A; ITO electrode and reflective electrode);
a first alignment layer on a side of the first transparent electrode layer facing away from the first substrate;
a second substrate at a side of the first alignment layer facing away from the first substrate (FIG. 1A; liquid crystal phased-array structure.);
a second transparent electrode layer on a side of the second substrate facing to the first substrate (FIG. 1A; ITO electrode and reflective electrode);
a second alignment layer on a side of the second transparent electrode layer facing to the first substrate (FIG. 1A, wherein alignment structures are explicitly disclosed.);
and a first liquid crystal layer between the first alignment layer and the second alignment layer;
wherein a first driving electric field is configured to be formed between the first transparent electrode layer and the second transparent electrode layer (FIG. 1A; discussion of applying voltage to liquid crystal pixels) to change a deflection state of the first liquid crystal layer (FIG. 1A, wherein Voltage-controlled beam deflection is disclosed.), to allow the polarization state of the first laser light to be changed or maintained (This is merely an intended use/result stemming from the voltage modulation of deflection.).
Regarding claim 11, MAO shows the limitations as per Claim 10 above, wherein the second scanner comprises:
a fourth optical element located near the target object (FIG. 2, wherein Scanner 102 is in the transmit/receive optical path and therefore an optical element.), and configured to deflect the second laser light from the plurality of second deflection directions to the second direction (FIG. 2, Scanner 102 receives and deflects returning echo beam L4 toward the liquid crystal phased array.);
and a fifth optical element disposed between the fourth optical element and the receiver (FIG. 2, Liquid crystal phased array 101 is positioned between scanner 102 and detector 104 in the receiving path.).
However, MAO fails to but XIONG does specifically disclose wherein an element disposed between one element and a receiver is configured to change or maintain a polarization state of the second laser light (S30; S303–S307; FIG. 6, The switchable liquid crystal half-wave plate changes or maintains circular polarization state).
Both MAO and XIONG are analogous to that of the claimed invention in that they all lie within the same field of endeavor.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one possessing ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify MAO in the spirit of XIONG because it involves switching angles in order to avoid time waste introduced by liquid crystal scanning (Contents of the Invention).
Regarding claim 14, MAO shows the limitations as per Claim 3 above, wherein the first scanner comprises N second optical elements (FIGS. 1A–1B; liquid crystal phased-array discussion);
wherein the N second optical elements are sequentially arranged on the side of the first optical element facing away from the transmitter (FIGS. 1A–1B; FIG. 2 and corresponding disclosure);
and N is an integer greater than 1 (FIG. 1B; discussion of multiple sections, rows, columns, and pixels).
Regarding claim 17, MAO shows the limitations as per Claim 14 above, wherein the first scanner comprises one third optical element (FIG. 2, discussion of collimating lens set);
wherein the N second optical elements are sequentially arranged on a side of the one third optical element facing away from the first optical element (FIG. 2; FIGS. 1A–1B).
Regarding claim 19, MAO shows the limitations as per Claim 11 above, wherein the second scanner comprises M fourth optical elements (FIG. 3; discussion of multi-surface tilting mirror; The reference discloses a polygonal or multi-surface tilting mirror having multiple reflecting surfaces. These surfaces provide a partial correspondence to multiple optical elements.);
the M fourth optical elements are sequentially arranged at a side of the target object (FIGs. 2&3 wherein the reflecting surfaces are part of a rotating mirror.);
and M is an integer greater than 1 (FIG. 3 and corresponding disclosure clearly show more than one reflecting surface.).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 5-7, 9, 12, 15-16 and 18 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Please see the Notice of References Cited form (PTO-892) for references discovered to be pertinent but not relied upon in this Action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JUSTIN W. RIDER whose telephone number is (571)270-1068. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday, 7.00 am - 4.30 pm.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Jamie J Atala can be reached at (571) 272-7384. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of published or unpublished applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Unpublished application information in Patent Center is available to registered users. To file and manage patent submissions in Patent Center, visit: https://patentcenter.uspto.gov. Visit https://www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/patent-center for more information about Patent Center and https://www.uspto.gov/patents/docx for information about filing in DOCX format. For additional questions, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
JUSTIN W. RIDER
Primary Patent Examiner
Art Unit 2486
/Justin W Rider/Primary Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2486
Prosecution Insights