DETAILED ACTION
This office action is in response to the application filed on January 8, 2025. Claims 1 – 21 are pending.
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
Acknowledgment is made of applicant's claim for priority based on U.S. provisional applications 63/618,917 filed on January 9, 2024.
Drawings
The drawings are objected to as failing to comply with 37 CFR 1.84(p)(5) because:
They include the following reference character(s) not mentioned in the description:
Fig. 1, Items 117, 121, 123
Fig. 2, Items 200A, 200B, 202B, 204, 210, 214
Fig. 3, Items 241 – 248
Fig. 4, Items 200A, 200B, 208A, 208B, 400, 406, 408
Fig. 8, 121
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d), or amendment to the specification to add the reference character(s) in the description in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(b) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
In addition to Replacement Sheets containing the corrected drawing figure(s), applicant is required to submit a marked-up copy of each Replacement Sheet including annotations indicating the changes made to the previous version. The marked-up copy must be clearly labeled as “Annotated Sheets” and must be presented in the amendment or remarks section that explains the change(s) to the drawings. See 37 CFR 1.121(d)(1). Failure to timely submit the proposed drawing and marked-up copy will result in the abandonment of the application.
CLAIM INTERPRETATION
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
(f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The claims in this application are given their broadest reasonable interpretation using the plain meaning of the claim language in light of the specification as it would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art. The broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim element (also commonly referred to as a claim limitation) is limited by the description in the specification when 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is invoked.
As explained in MPEP § 2181, subsection I, claim limitations that meet the following three-prong test will be interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
(A) the claim limitation uses the term “means” or “step” or a term used as a substitute for “means” that is a generic placeholder (also called a nonce term or a non-structural term having no specific structural meaning) for performing the claimed function;
(B) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is modified by functional language, typically, but not always linked by the transition word “for” (e.g., “means for”) or another linking word or phrase, such as “configured to” or “so that”; and
(C) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is not modified by sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function.
Use of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim with functional language creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites sufficient structure, material, or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Absence of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is not to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is not interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites function without reciting sufficient structure, material or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Claim limitations in this application that use the word “means” (or “step”) are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. Conversely, claim limitations in this application that do not use the word “means” (or “step”) are not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action.
This application includes one or more claim limitations that do not use the word “means,” but are nonetheless being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, because the claim limitation(s) uses a generic placeholder that is coupled with functional language without reciting sufficient structure to perform the recited function and the generic placeholder is not preceded by a structural modifier. Such claim limitation(s) is/are:
a scanning unit configured to deflect the first light towards the first portion of the FOV in claim 21.
Because this/these claim limitation(s) is/are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, it/they is/are being interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof.
A review of the specification shows that the following appears to be the corresponding structure described in the specification for the 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph limitation: the scanning unit is described in paragraph [0068], “in FIG. 2, the bi-static configuration includes a configuration where the outbound light and the inbound light pass through a single optical window 124 but scanning unit 104 includes two light deflectors, a first light deflector 114A for outbound light and a second light deflector 114B for inbound light” and further in paragraph [0059] where “The term “light deflector” broadly includes any mechanism or module which is configured to make light deviate from its original path; for example, a mirror, a prism, controllable lens, a mechanical mirror, mechanical scanning polygons, active diffraction (e.g., controllable LCD), Risley prisms, non-mechanical-electro-optical beam steering (such as made by Vscent), polarization grating (such as offered by Boulder Non-Linear Systems), optical phased array (OPA), and more”, which provides the structure to perform the claimed function.
If applicant does not intend to have this/these limitation(s) interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, applicant may: (1) amend the claim limitation(s) to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph (e.g., by reciting sufficient structure to perform the claimed function); or (2) present a sufficient showing that the claim limitation(s) recite(s) sufficient structure to perform the claimed function so as to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
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.
Claims 1 – 5, 7 – 12, 17 and 19 - 21 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Zheng-zheng ZHANG (CN 212364571 U) referred to as ZHANG hereinafter.
Regarding Claim 1, ZHANG discloses a rotatable LIDAR system (Fig. 2, laser radar), comprising:
a rotor configured to rotate about a central rotational axis (Page 4, paragraph 3, the motor 163 is divided into two parts, a stator and a rotor; the rotor part is installed on the rotating table 164, drives the rotating table 164 to rotate. the vertical reference is 302); and
multiple optical components mounted to the rotor (Page 4, paragraph 4, 212-first distance measuring (i.e. one optical component) module lowest end light; 221-second distance measuring module (i.e. another optical component) top light; 222-second distance measuring module lowest end light; 301-horizontal reference; 302-vertical reference) such that the optical components are configured to rotate about the central rotational axis (Page 4, paragraph 3, the rotor part is installed on the rotating table 164, drives the rotating table 164 to rotate. power supply for the device, and driving the motor 163 to rotate. the first distance measuring module 110, the second distance measuring module 120 and the main control circuit board 131 is installed on the rotating table 164 to realize the scanning distance of the distance measuring module. the vertical reference is 302), the optical components comprising:
a first light source configured to emit first light towards a first portion of a field of view (FOV) with a first range (Fig. 3, Page 4, paragraph 4, the first distance measuring module 110 the vertical direction of view angle is α, the most upper end light 211 along the horizontal direction, the lower end of the first distance measuring module light 212, i.e. 212-211 is the FOV for the first module); a first light detector configured to receive reflections of the first light from first objects in the first portion of the FOV (Page 1, paragraph 3, The LiDAR system realizes long distance detection (i.e. emit light) and object analysis (i.e. reflect light on first objects) by using laser beam (i.e. light source));
at least one second light source configured to emit second light towards a second portion of the FOV (Fig. 3, Page 4, paragraph 4, the second distance measuring module 120 vertical direction of view angle is β; the included angle between the most upper end light 221 and the lower end light 222) with a second range (i.e. 222-221 is the FOV for the second module) shorter than the first range (Abstract the second distance measuring module is used for measuring the space environment in the closer range (i.e. shorter than first range) of the distance road side laser radar); and a second light detector configured to receive reflections of the second light from second objects in the second portion of the FOV (Page 1, paragraph 3, The LiDAR system realizes long distance detection (i.e. emit light) and object analysis (i.e. reflect light on second objects) by using laser beam (i.e. light source)).
Regarding Claim 2, ZHANG discloses claim 1. ZHANG further discloses wherein the rotor comprises at least two stages (As illustrated in Fig. 2, Page 4, paragraph 3, a rotary table 164 has a left side (i.e. first stage) where the first distance measuring module 110 is mounted and a right side (i.e. second stage) where the second distance measuring module 120 is mounted), and wherein the optical components are mounted to the stages (Page 4, paragraph 3, the motor 163 is divided into two parts, a stator and a rotor; the stator part is installed on the shell; the rotor part is installed on the rotating table 164, drives the rotating table 164 to rotate. the power supply and the motor driving plate 141 is mounted on the shell 161, power supply for the device, and driving the motor 163 to rotate. the first distance measuring module 110, the second distance measuring module 120 and the main control circuit board 131 is installed on the rotating table 164 to realize the scanning distance of the distance measuring module).
Regarding Claim 3, ZHANG discloses claim 2. ZHANG further discloses wherein the at least two stages are spaced apart along the central rotational axis (As illustrated in Fig. 2, the left side and right side are separated along the 302-vertical reference (i.e. central rotational axis).
Regarding Claim 4, ZHANG discloses claim 3. ZHANG further discloses wherein the first light source is mounted to a first one of the at least two stages, and the second light source is mounted to a second one of the at least two stages (As illustrated in Fig. 2, a rotary table 164 has a left side (i.e. first stage) where the first distance measuring module 110 (i.e. first light source) is mounted and a right side (i.e. second stage) where the second distance measuring module 120 (i.e. second light source) is mounted).
Regarding Claim 5, ZHANG discloses claim 4. ZHANG further discloses further comprising a rounded window enclosing the second one of the at least two stages (Fig. 2, 162-laser radar light filter cover (i.e. rounded window)).
Regarding Claim 7, ZHANG discloses claim 1. ZHANG further discloses wherein the first portion of the FOV is offset from the second portion of the FOV (Fig. 3, Page 4, paragraph 4, the second distance measuring module 120 vertical direction of view angle is β; the included angle between the most upper end light 221 and the horizontal reference 301 is β', wherein β' > α, where β' – β = offset).
Regarding Claim 8, ZHANG discloses claim 1. ZHANG further discloses wherein the first portion of the FOV and the second portion of the FOV do not overlap (As illustrated in Fig. 3, the first portion (211-212) and second portion (221-222) of the FOV do not overlap).
Regarding Claim 9, ZHANG discloses claim 1. ZHANG further discloses wherein a yaw angle is defined by rotation about the central rotational axis (Fig. 3, the vertical direction of view angle), and wherein an instantaneous FOV illuminated by the first light source and an instantaneous FOV illuminated by the second light source have different yaw angles at any time (Page 4, paragraph 4, the horizontal reference of the roadside laser radar 100 is 301; the vertical reference is 302 (i.e. center rotational axis). the first distance measuring module 110 the vertical direction of view angle is α (i.e. first yaw angle), the most upper end light 211 along the horizontal direction, the lower end of the first distance measuring module light 212 and the horizontal reference 301 included angle is α, the second distance measuring module 120 vertical direction of view angle is β (i.e. second yaw angle, different from first); the included angle between the most upper end light 221 and the horizontal reference 301 is β ', wherein β' > α).
Regarding Claim 10, ZHANG discloses claim 9. ZHANG further discloses wherein an instantaneous FOV illuminated by the first light source and an instantaneous FOV illuminated by the second light source do not overlap at any time (As illustrated in Fig. 3, the first light ends 211-212 and second light ends 221-222 of the FOV do not overlap at any time).
Regarding Claim 11, ZHANG discloses claim 1. ZHANG further discloses wherein a pitch angle is defined by a rotation about an axis perpendicular to the central rotational axis (Page 4, paragraph 4, the horizontal reference of the roadside laser radar 100 is 301 (i.e. pitch angle)), and wherein an instantaneous FOV illuminated by the first light source and an instantaneous FOV illuminated by the second light source have different pitch angles (As illustrated in Fig. 3, first light source 110 has a pitch angle different from second light source 120).
Regarding Claim 12, ZHANG discloses claim 11. ZHANG further discloses wherein a pitch range of the second portion of the FOV (Fig. 3, pitch range from 222 to 221) is double a pitch range of the first portion of the FOV (Fig. 3, pitch range from 222 to 221 is second pitch range, pitch range from 212 to 211 is the first pitch range, As illustrated in Fig. 3, the pitch range for the second portion is larger than the pitch range of the first portion. The roadside laser radar, wherein the first distance measuring module detecting distance, high resolution, preferably, the angle resolution of the first distance measuring module theta 1 is less than or equal to 0.6 degrees. The roadside laser radar, wherein the second distance measuring module light beam resolution is low, preferably, the angle resolution of the second distance measuring module theta 1 is not less than 2 degrees (i.e. double the first portion)).
Regarding Claim 17, ZHANG discloses claim 1. ZHANG further discloses wherein a resolution of FOV measurement is lower for the second portion of the FOV than for the first portion of the FOV (Page 2, paragraph 13, the roadside laser radar, wherein the first distance measuring module detecting distance, high resolution, the road side laser radar, wherein the second distance measuring module light beam resolution is low (i.e. second portion lower than the first portion)).
Regarding Claim 19, ZHANG discloses claim 1. ZHANG further discloses further comprising a processor configured to control the first light source and second light source independently from one another (Page 2, paragraph 10, the main control module (i.e. processor) is respectively connected with the first distance measuring module and the second distance measuring module, Page 4, paragraph 1, for controlling the first module and the second module for measuring distance. the control module 130 mainly controls the first ranging module 110 and the second ranging module 120 to measure the distance).
Regarding Claim 20, ZHANG discloses claim 1. ZHANG further discloses further comprising a processor configured to: receive signals from the first light detector and second light detector indicative of the reflections of the first light and the reflections of the second light, and based on the signals (Page 4, paragraph 1, the control module 130 (i.e. processor) mainly controls the first ranging module 110 and the second ranging module 120 to measure the distance), generate a combined point cloud including the first objects and the second objects (Page 4, paragraph 4, the viewing angle W= β + β ' of the laser radar 100 in the vertical direction. Preferably, 60 ° ≤W≤90 °, the beam density distribution is more beneficial for using the point cloud (i.e. generate point cloud), reduces the device cost and improves the data efficiency).
Regarding Claim 21, ZHANG discloses claim 1. ZHANG further discloses wherein the optical components further comprise a scanning unit configured to deflect the first light towards the first portion of the FOV (Page 4, paragraph 3, the first distance measuring module 110, the second distance measuring module 120 and the main control circuit board 131 is installed on the rotating table 164 to realize the scanning distance of the distance measuring module (i.e. scanning unit)).
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 of this title, 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.
Claim 6 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over ZHANG (CN 212364571 U) in view of Burnette et al., (US 2023/0068067 A1) referred to as Burnette hereinafter.
Regarding Claim 6, ZHANG discloses claim 2. ZHANG further discloses wherein the at least two stages are attached to one another (Fig. 2, Page 4, paragraph 3, the rotor part is installed on the rotating table 164, drives the rotating table 164 to rotate. the first distance measuring module 110, the second distance measuring module 120 and the main control circuit board 131 is installed on the rotating table 164 (i.e. attached to one another) to realize the scanning distance of the distance measuring module).
ZHANG does not specifically teach removably attached. Therefore, ZHANG fails to explicitly teach removably attached to one another.
However, Burnette teaches removably attached to one another (Fig. 3, Par. [0067] The lidar 112 is mounted on a removable part 302).
References ZHANG and Burnette are considered to be analogous art because they relate to multiple lidar systems. Therefore, it would be obvious to one possessing ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to specify removably attachable lidar as taught by Burnette in the invention of ZHANG. This modification would allow the Lidar location and orientation to be easily changed by modifying that part (See Burnette, Par. [0067]).
Claim 13 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over ZHANG (CN 212364571 U) in view of SAITO HIROAKI (JP 2017150902 A) referred to as HIROAKI hereinafter.
Regarding Claim 13, ZHANG discloses claim 1. ZHANG further discloses wherein the rotor is configured to mount (FIG. 3 Page 4, paragraph 5, is a large field of view roadside laser radar provided by the utility model vertical direction of view field distribution. the laser radar 110 mounting height is H) such that, on a road, the second portion of the FOV includes the road (Fig. 3 Page 4, paragraph 4, second portion of FOV from 221 to 222 includes the road surface, the second distance measuring module 120 on the light 221 on the road surface of the distance D3 = H/tan (β '). the second distance measuring module 120 lower light 222 to the road surface of the distance D4 = H/tan (β + β ')).
ZHANG does not specifically teach mounted to a vehicle. Therefore, ZHANG fails to explicitly teach wherein configured to mount to a vehicle such that, when the vehicle is on a road, the second portion of the FOV includes the road.
However, HIROAKI teaches configured to mount to a vehicle such that, when the vehicle is on a road (Fig. 3, Fig. 5, Page 3, paragraph 1, The in-vehicle laser radar device 30 according to the present invention is a laser radar device that is installed on a moving body A (preferably an upper portion thereof) and rotates around a vertical axis 31 to measure a surrounding road surface 1. The vertical axis 31 is preferably a rotation axis perpendicular to the road surface 1 when the road surface 1 is horizontal), the second portion of the FOV includes the road (Fig. 1, Fig. 2, Page 7, reference sign list, 7B Lower radar system includes the FOV of 1 road surface).
References ZHANG and HIROAKI are considered to be analogous art because they relate to multiple lidar systems. Therefore, it would be obvious to one possessing ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to specify vehicle mounted lidar systems as taught by HIROAKI in the invention of ZHANG. This modification would allow the road surface to be measured with substantially the same spatial resolution regardless of whether it is near or far away, so that it is easy to find distant obstacles and high speed traveling is possible. (See HIROAKI, Par. [0067]).
Claims 14 and 15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over ZHANG (CN 212364571 U) in view of HWANG et al. (US 2021/0409379 A1) referred to as HWANG hereinafter.
Regarding Claim 14, ZHANG discloses claim 1. ZHANG does not specifically teach an edge emitter laser. Therefore, ZHANG fails to explicitly teach wherein the first light source comprises an edge emitter laser.
However, HWANG teaches wherein the first light source comprises an edge emitter laser (Fig. 2, Par. [0209]-[0210] the LiDAR device 1310 may include a laser beam output unit, where the laser beam output unit may emit a laser beam. Also, the laser beam output unit may include one or more laser beam output elements. Also, the laser beam output units may include a laser diode (LD), a solid-state laser, a high power laser, a light-emitting diode (LED), a vertical-cavity surface-emitting laser (VCSEL), an external cavity diode laser (ECDL) (i.e. edge emitter laser), etc.).
References ZHANG and HWANG are considered to be analogous art because they relate to multiple lidar systems. Therefore, it would be obvious to one possessing ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to specify an edge emitter laser as taught by HWANG in the invention of ZHANG. This modification would allow various types of radar devices in order to acquire accurate distance information of objects located at long distances from the vehicle, objects located at medium distances, and objects located at short distances. (See HWANG, Par. [0234]).
Regarding Claim 15, ZHANG discloses claim 1. ZHANG does not specifically teach a VCSEL array. Therefore, ZHANG fails to explicitly teach wherein the second light source comprises a VCSEL array.
However, HWANG teaches wherein the second light source comprises a VCSEL array (Fig. 2, Par. [0209]-[0210] the LiDAR device 1310 may include a laser beam output unit, where the laser beam output unit may emit a laser beam. Also, the laser beam output unit may include one or more laser beam output elements. Also, the laser beam output units may include a laser diode (LD), a solid-state laser, a high power laser, a light-emitting diode (LED), a vertical-cavity surface-emitting laser (VCSEL), an external cavity diode laser (ECDL) (i.e. edge emitter laser), etc.).
References ZHANG and HWANG are considered to be analogous art because they relate to multiple lidar systems. Therefore, it would be obvious to one possessing ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to specify a VCSEL array as taught by HWANG in the invention of ZHANG. This modification would allow various types of radar devices in order to acquire accurate distance information of objects located at long distances from the vehicle, objects located at medium distances, and objects located at short distances. (See HWANG, Par. [0234]).
Claim 16 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over ZHANG (CN 212364571 U) in view of Smith et al. (US 2020/0150238 A1) referred to as Smith hereinafter.
Regarding Claim 16, ZHANG discloses claim 1. ZHANG does not specifically teach wavelength of lights. Therefore, ZHANG fails to explicitly teach wherein a wavelength of the first light differs from a wavelength of the second light.
However, Smith teaches wherein a wavelength of the first light differs from a wavelength of the second light (Fig. 2, Fig. 3, Par. [0020] The first light source 108 is configured to generate light at a first wavelength in a first range of wavelengths. between 800 and 1100 nanometers (“nm”). Par. [0029] The second light source 118 is configured to generate light at a second wavelength in a second range of wavelengths. In the exemplary embodiment, the second range of wavelengths is between 1230 and 1600 nm (i.e. differs from the first light)).
References ZHANG and Smith are considered to be analogous art because they relate to multiple lidar systems. Therefore, it would be obvious to one possessing ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to specify a first light wavelength differs from the second light wavelength as taught by Smith in the invention of ZHANG. This modification would minimize the interference between the first light source and the second light source (See Smith, Par. [0033]).
Claim 18 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over ZHANG (CN 212364571 U) in view of HASSIBI et al. (US 2024/0393438 A1) referred to as HASSIBI hereinafter.
Regarding Claim 18, ZHANG discloses claim 1. ZHANG further discloses wherein the first range is at least more than the second range (the first ranging module 110 mainly detects and detects the remote area; the second ranging module 120 is mainly responsible for detecting the spatial information of the proximal region; The far and near according to the actual requirement and scene, in this embodiment, less than 30 meters as the proximal region, more than 30 meters as the distal region. The far space or near space is determined according to the actual scene and the requirement of the user, is not fixed, in the actual scene, the user can determine a dividing point, such as 30 m or 40 m, exceeds the value is far, otherwise, it is closer).
ZHANG does not specifically teach the first range is double the second range. Therefore, ZHANG fails to explicitly teach the first range is at least double the second range.
However, HASSIBI teaches the first range is at least double the second range (Fig. 2, Fig. 13, Par. [0146] The short-range LiDAR subsystem 100B (not specifically illustrated in FIG. 13 but included in the hybrid LiDAR system 200 as described above) has a coverage 215, and the long-range LiDAR subsystem 100A (also not specifically illustrated in FIG. 13 but included in the hybrid LiDAR system 200 as described above) has a coverage 225. The distance d1 (i.e. second range) may be, for example, up to 300 m, and the distance d2 (i.e. first range) may be significantly larger (e.g., 800 m or more) (i.e. at least double)).
References ZHANG and HASSIBI are considered to be analogous art because they relate to multiple lidar systems. Therefore, it would be obvious to one possessing ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to specify the first range is at least double the second range as taught by HASSIBI in the invention of ZHANG. This modification would generate dense uniform point clouds of objects in near and short range and identify long-range point targets with high range resolution and high angular resolution (See HASSIBI, Par. [0144]).
Conclusion
The prior art references made of record are not relied upon but are considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. ZHANG (CN 206892337 U) teaches cascade laser radar device where the main light level in one laser detector module of multiple detecting units of said plurality of laser detection modules is forward and the main light multiple detection unit main light of the other laser detector module of multiple detecting units is downward. LUO (CN 223551888 U) teaches a solid state laser radar system with a first laser radar module located at the upper part of the inner part of the shell and a second laser radar module located at the lower part of the inner part of the shell. Gruver et al. (US 2016/0282468 A1) teaches a vehicle with multiple light detection and ranging devices, specifically includes a first light detection and ranging device (LIDAR) has a first resolution configured to scan an environment around the vehicle based on rotation of the first LIDAR about an axis and includes a second LIDAR has a second resolution configured to scan a field-of-view of the environment that extends away from the vehicle along a viewing direction of the second LIDAR..
Any inquiry concerning this communication should be directed to SUSAN E HODGES whose telephone number is (571)270-0498. The Examiner can normally be reached on Monday - Friday from 8:00 am (EST) to 4:00 pm (EST).
If attempts to reach the Examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the Examiner's supervisor, Brian T. Pendleton, can be reached on (571) . The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://portal.uspto.gov/external/portal. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free).
/Susan E. Hodges/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2425
Prosecution Insights