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 .
Specification
The disclosure is objected to because of the following informalities:
On Page 1, 3, 12, and 16 the Examiner assumes that “tuneable” should actually be --tunable--.
On Pages 3 and 22, the Examiner assumes that “a trans-impendence amplifier” should actually be --a trans-impedance amplifier--.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Objections
Claims 1-2, 6, 9-11, 13, 15, 18, and 22 are objected to because of the following informalities:
Claim 1, Lines 1-2: the Examiner assumes that “property of a gas comprising” should actually be --property of a gas, comprising--.
Claim 1, Line 6: the Examiner assumes that “sensor signal,” should actually be --sensor signal, and--.
Claim 1, Lines 8-9: the Examiner assumes that “the light sensor,” should actually be --the light sensor, and--.
Claim 2, Line 3: the Examiner assumes that “of lens arrangement” should actually be --of the lens arrangement--.
Claim 6, Line 2: the Examiner assumes that “the sensor assembly and” should actually be --the sensor assembly, and--.
Claim 9, Line 2: the Examiner assumes that “sensor comprising at least one” should actually be --sensor comprises at least one--.
Claim 10, Line 2: the Examiner assumes that “sensor comprising at least one” should actually be --sensor comprises at least one--.
Claim 11, Line 2: the Examiner assumes that “sensor comprising at least one” should actually be --sensor comprises at least one--.
Claim 13, Line 2: the Examiner assumes that “a trans-impendence amplifier” should actually be --a trans-impedance amplifier--.
Claim 15, Line 2: the Examiner assumes that “a tuneable diode” should actually be --a tunable diode--.
Claim 18, Line 3: the Examiner assumes that “to transmission axis” should actually be --to the transmission axis--.
Claim 22, Line 1 the Examiner assumes that “property of a gas comprising” should actually be --property of a gas, comprising--.
Claim 22, Line 4: the Examiner assumes that “a lens plane,” should actually be --a lens plane, and--.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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 (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) 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 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.
Claims 1-17, and 20-22 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Brydegaard (US 2020/0217791), hereinafter Brydegaard, in view of Schneiter et al. (US 4,963,017, disclosed in IDS 18 April 2025).
Claim 1: Brydegaard discloses a device (100, Fig. 2) for detecting a property of a gas (90), comprising:
a light source (20) configured to emit a light along at least a transmission axis (30) [0022],
a light detection arrangement (40) comprising:
a light sensor (70) configured to output a sensor signal (75) [0022], and
a lens arrangement (50) having a lens plane (60), and being configured to direct the light from the light source (20) and scattered by the gas (90) to the light sensor (70) [0022],
wherein a first axis (80), the transmission axis (30), and the lens plane (60) intersect such that a Scheimpflug condition (61) is achieved [0024].
Brydegaard is silent with respect to an actuator assembly configured to move the light sensor in a direction parallel to at least a first axis.
Schneiter, however, in the same field of endeavor of laser radar, discloses a device (42, Fig. 7) for detecting a distance to an object (18), comprising:
a light source (43) configured to emit light along at least a transmission axis (44) (Col. 5, Lines 49-51),
a light detection arrangement comprising:
a light sensor (50) configured to output a sensor signal (Col. 5, Lines 44-49), and
a lens arrangement (45) having a lens plane (52), and being configured to direct the light from the light source (43) and reflected by the object (18) to the light sensor (50) (Col. 5, Lines 51-56),
an actuator assembly (51) configured to move the light sensor (50) in a direction parallel to at least a first axis (53) (Col. 5, Lines 56-59),
wherein the first axis (53), the transmission axis (44), and the lens plane (52) intersect such that a Scheimpflug condition is achieved, (Col. 5, Lines 60-64).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify Brydegaard’s device with an actuator assembly to move the light sensor for the purpose of easily adjusting the geometry of the device based on the application to obtain the desired level of performance (Schneiter, Col. 1, Lines 53-57).
Claim 2: Brydegaard is silent with respect to the actuator assembly.
Schneiter, however, discloses wherein the actuator assembly (51) is further configured to move the light sensor (50) in a direction parallel to a second axis (52), corresponding to an optical axis of the lens arrangement (45) (Col. 5, Lines 56-59). Since the actuator assembly (51) can move the light sensor (50) along an arc (evident from Fig. 7), there is inherently a point at which the light sensor (50) moves parallel to the second axis (52).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify Brydegaard’s device so that the actuator assembly moves the light sensor along the second axis for the purpose of easily adjusting the geometry of the device based on the application to obtain the desired level of performance (Schneiter, Col. 1, Lines 53-57).
Claim 3: Brydegaard is silent with respect to the actuator assembly.
Schneiter, however, discloses wherein the actuator assembly (51) is further configured to move the light sensor (50) in a direction parallel to a third axis orthogonal to the second axis (52) and in a plane defined by the first axis (53) and second axis (52) (Col. 5, Lines 56-59). Since the actuator assembly (51) can move the light sensor (50) along an arc (evident from Fig. 7), it inherently moves in the plane defined by the first axis (53) and the second axis (52) (plane of the page) and there is inherently a point at which the light sensor (50) moves parallel to the third axis.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify Brydegaard’s device so that the actuator assembly moves the light sensor along the third axis for the purpose of easily adjusting the geometry of the device based on the application to obtain the desired level of performance (Schneiter, Col. 1, Lines 53-57).
Claim 4: Brydegaard is silent with respect to the actuator assembly.
Schneiter, however, discloses wherein the actuator assembly (51) is configured to move the light sensor (50) along the image line (53), wherein the image line (53) may be moved (Col. 5, Lines 64-68).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify Schneiter’s actuator assembly to allow for additional movement, such as in a direction parallel to a fourth axis along a normal of the plane defined by the first axis and second axis for the purpose of more precisely determining ranging information.
It would have been furthermore obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify Brydegaard’s device so that the actuator assembly moves the light sensor along the fourth axis for the purpose of easily adjusting the geometry of the device based on the application to obtain the desired level of performance (Schneiter, Col. 1, Lines 53-57).
Claim 5: Brydegaard further discloses wherein the light sensor (70) is mounted on a sensor assembly (40) [0022].
Claim 6: Brydegaard is silent with respect to the light sensor being movable with respect to the sensor assembly.
Schneiter, however, discloses wherein the light sensor (50) is mounted on a sensor assembly (49) and is moveable with respect to the sensor assembly (49) (Col. 5, Lines 56-59), and the actuator assembly (51) comprises a first actuator (51) configured to move the light sensor (50) (Col. 5, Lines 56-59).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify Brydegaard’s light sensor to be movable with respect to the sensor assembly for the purpose of easily adjusting the geometry of the device based on the application to obtain the desired level of performance (Schneiter, Col. 1, Lines 53-57).
Claim 7: Brydegaard is silent with respect to the light sensor being movable with respect to the sensor assembly.
Schneiter, however, discloses wherein the light sensor (50) is mounted on a sensor assembly (49), wherein the sensor assembly (49) is moveable with respect to a housing of the device (42) (Col. 5, Lines 56-59), and the actuator assembly (51) comprises a second actuator (51) configured to move the sensor assembly (49) (Col. 5, Lines 56-59).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify Brydegaard’s sensor assembly to be movable with respect to the housing of the device for the purpose of easily adjusting the geometry of the device based on the application to obtain the desired level of performance (Schneiter, Col. 1, Lines 53-57).
Claim 8: Brydegaard is silent with respect to the light sensor being movable with respect to the sensor assembly.
Schneiter, however, discloses wherein the light sensor (50) is mounted on a sensor assembly (49), wherein the sensor assembly (49) is moveable with respect to a housing of the device (42) along a rail(Col. 5, Lines 56-59).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify Brydegaard’s sensor assembly to be movable with respect to the housing of the device along a rail for the purpose of easily adjusting the geometry of the device based on the application to obtain the desired level of performance (Schneiter, Col. 1, Lines 53-57).
Claim 9: Brydegaard further discloses wherein the light sensor (70) comprises at least one of a single pixel, a quadrant of pixels, an array of pixels, a pixel matrix, a position sensitive device (PSD) pixel [0026].
Claim 10: Brydegaard further discloses wherein the light sensor (70) comprises at least one column of pixels aligned parallel to the first axis (80) (“Light sensor has a pixel column aligned to an image plane 80 and configured to output a sensor signal 75 to the hardware processor” [0022]).
Claim 11: Brydegaard further discloses wherein the light sensor (70) comprising at least one row of pixels aligned parallel to the fourth axis (inherent since the plane 80 extends along the fourth axis, “Light sensor has a pixel column aligned to an image plane 80 and configured to output a sensor signal 75 to the hardware processor” [0022]).
Claim 12: Brydegaard further discloses wherein the light sensor (70) comprises at least one of a photo diode, an avalanche photodiode, a photo multiplying tube (pmt), and a CMOS sensor [0026].
Claim 13: Brydegaard further discloses wherein the light sensor (70) comprises at least one of a trans-impedance amplifier, free silicon amplifier, current amplifier, and dynode amplifier (a trans-impedance amplifier in inherent in a CMOS sensor [0026]).
Claim 14: Brydegaard further discloses wherein the light sensor (70) is configured to detect a signal generated by at least one of wavelength modulation spectroscopy, direct absorption spectroscopy, and/or frequency modulation spectroscopy (“The absorption profile of the gas may be determined in dependence on at least one of: direct absorption spectroscopy, wavelength modulation spectroscopy, and frequency modulation spectroscopy…” [0044]).
Claim 15: Brydegaard further discloses wherein light source (20) is a tunable diode laser [0023].
Claim 16: Brydegaard further discloses wherein the light source (20) is controlled in a TDLAS fashion [0019].
Claim 17: Brydegaard further discloses wherein the light source (20) is controlled in a DIAL fashion [0018].
Claim 20: Brydegaard further discloses wherein the device (100) comprises a sensor window (inherent interface) positioned between the light sensor (70) and the lens arrangement (50) (evident from Fig. 2).
Claim 21: Brydegaard further discloses wherein the sensor window comprises a slit having (230) (Fig. 4) [0042], but does not explicitly disclose wherein the slight has an adjustable width in a direction along the first axis.
However, it has been held that the provision of adjustability, where needed, involves only routine skill in the art. In re Stevens, 101 USPQ 284 (CCPA 1954)
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify Brydegaard’s sensor window to make the slight width adjustable in a direction along the first axis for the purpose of modulating the detection signals to prevent saturation of the light sensor.
Claim 22: Brydegaard discloses a method (using device 100 of Fig. 2) for detecting a property of a gas (90), comprising:
emitting a light (from 20) along at least a transmission axis (30) [0022],
directing the light scattered by the gas (90) to a light sensor (70) using a lens arrangement (50) having a lens plane (60) [0022],
wherein a first axis (80), the transmission axis (30), and the lens plane (60) intersect such that a Scheimpflug condition (61) is achieved [0024].
Brydegaard is silent with respect to imaging a volume of gas at a particular distance from a device by moving the light sensor to a corresponding position along a first axis.
Schneiter, however, in the same field of endeavor of laser radar, discloses a method (using device 42 of Fig. 7) for detecting a distance to an object (18), comprising:
emitting a light (from 43) along at least a transmission axis (44) (Col. 5, Lines 49-51),
directing the light reflected by the object (18) to a light sensor (50) using a lens arrangement (45) having a lens plane (52) (Col. 5, Lines 51-56), and
imaging the object (18) at a particular distance from the device (42) by moving the light sensor (50) to a corresponding position along a first axis (Col. 5, Lines 51-59),
wherein the first axis (53), the transmission axis (44), and the lens plane (52) intersect such that a Scheimpflug condition is achieved (Col. 5, Lines 60-64).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify Brydegaard’s method by moving the light sensor for the purpose of easily adjusting the geometry of the device based on the application to obtain the desired level of performance (Schneiter, Col. 1, Lines 53-57).
Claim 18-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Brydegaard, in view of Schneiter as applied to claims 4 and 19 above, and further in view of Yeruhami et al. (US 2020/0249354), hereinafter Yeruhami.
Claim 18: Brydegaard is silent with respect to the light source comprising an array of individual light sources.
Yeruhami, however, in the same field of endeavor of LIDAR technology, discloses a device (Fig. 2E) comprising a light source (102) configured to emit a light along at least a transmission axis (horizontally, to the right),
wherein the light source (102) comprises an array of individual light sources (112A-112F) arranged orthogonal (vertical) to a transmission axis [0136].
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify Brydegaard’s light source to comprise an array of individual light sources, arranged parallel to a fifth axis orthogonal to the transmission axis, for the purpose of allowing for sequential or simultaneous illumination, as desired for the specific application.
Claim 19: Brydegaard is silent with respect to the light sensor comprising a single sensor pixel.
Yeruhami, however, in the same field of endeavor of LIDAR technology, discloses a device (Fig. 2E) comprising a light sensor configured to output a sensor signal [01112],
wherein the light sensor comprises a single sensor pixel [0430].
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify Brydegaard’s light sensor to comprise a single sensor pixel for the purpose of obtaining an instantaneous reading to fulfill binning techniques (Yeruhami [0430]).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the Examiner should be directed to HINA F AYUB whose telephone number is (571)270-3171. The Examiner can normally be reached on 9am-5pm ET Mon-Fri.
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, Tarifur Chowdhury can be reached on 571-272-2287. 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://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/Hina F Ayub/
Primary Patent Examiner
Art Unit 2877
Prosecution Insights