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 .
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.
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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claims 1-14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. sec. 103 as being unpatentable as obvious in view of United States Patent No.: US 10 340 651 B1 to Drummer et al. that was filed on 2018 (hereinafter “Drummer”) and in view of United States Patent Application Pub. No.: US20080074640A1 to Walsh that was filed in 2007.
PNG
media_image1.png
807
1098
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Drummer discloses “...1. A light detection and ranging (LIDAR) sensor system, comprising: (see FIG. 8 where the lidar device include an internal window 510 and an output beam 125 to the target and has a receiver 140 and a light source emitter 110)
a window; (see FIG. 8 and window 510)
PNG
media_image2.png
849
1161
media_image2.png
Greyscale
a first light emitter comprising a laser source configured to emit a laser beam;; (see FIG. 10 to 11 where the light source has a seed laser with a pulse that is amplified by the amplifier 600 and for ranging pulse 462c)
PNG
media_image3.png
581
1171
media_image3.png
Greyscale
one or more scanning optics configured to output the beam through the window; and (see FIG. 8 where the light source is connected to a splitter and collimator 440 and a ranging pulse is provided through the window 510 for an output beam to the target 130)
a sensor, comprising: (see FIG. 8, block 140)
The primary reference is silent but Walsh teaches “…a second light emitter configured to output a sensor beam, wherein the second light emitter is configured to output the sensor beam outside of a period of time in which the laser beam from the laser source passes through” (See paragraph 26-33 where the device can use a second LIDAR device or a second array of lidar devices instead of splitting with a time multiplexed arrangement of the pulses)
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the present disclosure to combine the disclosure of DRUMMER with the teachings of WALSH to provide a second laser device. This can be a super bright white laser beam. See claims 1-6. To ensure registration, the illumination path is triggered within a short period of time of the LIDAR pulse, typically a microsecond, so as to effectively freeze the target scan motion. In this respect, the illumination source can be comparatively slow (microseconds rather than 100s picoseconds) to the advantage of not adding significantly to the (combined) accessible emission limit (AEL) and system laser classification. The full color LIDAR system 300 uses a “white” laser 302 as discussed above with respect to the FIG. 2 system 200. . This produces a plurality of time-separated or time-resolved wavelength-separated “color” pulse components. The time-resolved color pulse components are then recombined, preferably using a fiber-optic coupler-splitter (combiner) 308, for detection at a common detector 310, e.g. an ADP. By synchronization with multi-trigger timing electronics 312 and associated pulse intensity measurement circuitry (not shown), all of the spectral/color components can be detected and their arrival time, corrected from knowledge of the individual lengths of the fiber delay lines, recorded together with their relative intensity (image color). This can provide an improved accurate device. See claims 1-8 and paragraph 26-33.
Drummer discloses “…the window; (see col. 4, lines 10-45 where the light source can be a pulsed or cw laser diode that can be amplified to a different amplification state)
PNG
media_image4.png
216
909
media_image4.png
Greyscale
a first optic coupled to the window, the first optic configured to receive the sensor beam from the second light emitter and direct the sensor beam into the window at a particular angle relative to a surface of the window such that the sensor beam undergoes total internal reflection in the window; (see FIG. 8 where the light can pass through the window 510 via an output beam 125 to the target 130 or alternatively some can pass back and be reflected inwards from the window as an internal scatter 520 and received by the diffuser 452 to an optical trigger signal to the receiver 140) (see col. 24, lines 1-65)
a second optic coupled to the window, the second optic configured to receive the light directed into the window by the first optic; and (see diffuser 452 that receives the scattered light from the window reflection and then can provide a second so called optical trigger signal to the receiver) (see col. 24, lines 1-65)
a detector configured to receive the light from the second optic and to output a signal indicative of a presence of an obscurant on the window based on the light received from the second optic. (see col. 26, lines 1-25 where the window can be obscured with dirt dust mud etc. and this can provide an increased in pulse duration/amplitude and then the window has an obscured element thereon)
Drummer discloses “...The LIDAR system of claim 1, wherein the second light emitter is configured to output the sensor beam as output pulses on a periodic basis, wherein the output pulses of the sensor beam do not overlap with the laser beam emitted by the first light emitter. (see col. 26, lines 1-40 where the window can be obscured with dirt dust mud etc. and this can provide an increased in pulse duration/amplitude and then the window has an obscured element thereon)”.
Drummer is silent but Walsh teaches “...3. The LIDAR system of claim 1, wherein the sensor comprises a plurality of second
emitters respectively configured to output a plurality of sensor beams. (See paragraph 26-33 where the device can use a second LIDAR device or a second array of lidar devices instead of splitting with a time multiplexed arrangement of the pulses)
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the present disclosure to combine the disclosure of DRUMMER with the teachings of WALSH to provide a second laser device. This can be a super bright white laser beam. See claims 1-6. To ensure registration, the illumination path is triggered within a short period of time of the LIDAR pulse, typically a microsecond, so as to effectively freeze the target scan motion. In this respect, the illumination source can be comparatively slow (microseconds rather than 100s picoseconds) to the advantage of not adding significantly to the (combined) accessible emission limit (AEL) and system laser classification. The full color LIDAR system 300 uses a “white” laser 302 as discussed above with respect to the FIG. 2 system 200. . This produces a plurality of time-separated or time-resolved wavelength-separated “color” pulse components. The time-resolved color pulse components are then recombined, preferably using a fiber-optic coupler-splitter (combiner) 308, for detection at a common detector 310, e.g. an ADP. By synchronization with multi-trigger timing electronics 312 and associated pulse intensity measurement circuitry (not shown), all of the spectral/color components can be detected and their arrival time, corrected from knowledge of the individual lengths of the fiber delay lines, recorded together with their relative intensity (image color). This can provide an improved accurate device. See claims 1-8 and paragraph 26-33.
PNG
media_image5.png
594
1198
media_image5.png
Greyscale
Drummer is silent but Walsh teaches “...4. The LIDAR system of claim 3, wherein the plurality of sensor beams are output simultaneously by the plurality of second emitters.”. ((See paragraph 26-33 where the device can use a second LIDAR device or a second array of lidar devices instead of splitting with a time multiplexed arrangement of the pulses)
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the present disclosure to combine the disclosure of DRUMMER with the teachings of WALSH to provide a second laser device. This can be a super bright white laser beam. See claims 1-6. To ensure registration, the illumination path is triggered within a short period of time of the LIDAR pulse, typically a microsecond, so as to effectively freeze the target scan motion. In this respect, the illumination source can be comparatively slow (microseconds rather than 100s picoseconds) to the advantage of not adding significantly to the (combined) accessible emission limit (AEL) and system laser classification. The full color LIDAR system 300 uses a “white” laser 302 as discussed above with respect to the FIG. 2 system 200. . This produces a plurality of time-separated or time-resolved wavelength-separated “color” pulse components. The time-resolved color pulse components are then recombined, preferably using a fiber-optic coupler-splitter (combiner) 308, for detection at a common detector 310, e.g. an ADP. By synchronization with multi-trigger timing electronics 312 and associated pulse intensity measurement circuitry (not shown), all of the spectral/color components can be detected and their arrival time, corrected from knowledge of the individual lengths of the fiber delay lines, recorded together with their relative intensity (image color). This can provide an improved accurate device. See claims 1-8 and paragraph 26-33.
Drummer is silent but Walsh teaches “… The LIDAR system of claim 3, wherein the plurality of sensor beams are output non-simultaneously by the plurality of second emitters(See paragraph 26-33 where the device can use a second LIDAR device or a second array of lidar devices instead of splitting with a time multiplexed arrangement of the pulses)
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the present disclosure to combine the disclosure of DRUMMER with the teachings of WALSH to provide a second laser device. This can be a super bright white laser beam. See claims 1-6. To ensure registration, the illumination path is triggered within a short period of time of the LIDAR pulse, typically a microsecond, so as to effectively freeze the target scan motion. In this respect, the illumination source can be comparatively slow (microseconds rather than 100s picoseconds) to the advantage of not adding significantly to the (combined) accessible emission limit (AEL) and system laser classification. The full color LIDAR system 300 uses a “white” laser 302 as discussed above with respect to the FIG. 2 system 200. . This produces a plurality of time-separated or time-resolved wavelength-separated “color” pulse components. The time-resolved color pulse components are then recombined, preferably using a fiber-optic coupler-splitter (combiner) 308, for detection at a common detector 310, e.g. an ADP. By synchronization with multi-trigger timing electronics 312 and associated pulse intensity measurement circuitry (not shown), all of the spectral/color components can be detected and their arrival time, corrected from knowledge of the individual lengths of the fiber delay lines, recorded together with their relative intensity (image color). This can provide an improved accurate device. See claims 1-8 and paragraph 26-33.
Drummer discloses “...6. The LIDAR system of claim 1, wherein the particular angle is determined based at least in part on an index of refraction of the window.. (see Col. 2, lines 1-25).
PNG
media_image6.png
719
1051
media_image6.png
Greyscale
Drummer discloses “...7. The LIDAR system of claim 1, further comprising a modulator configured to modulate a phase or an amplitude of the sensor beam.”. (see element 452 and FIG. 12 and 13 where the light source is emitted through the window 100 and then hits the target and then comes back as an input beam 135 to an epoxy input lens 680 and 570 to the APD and diffuser have a different property 452 to the optical trigger; see element 680 as having an epoxy and col. 28 line 50 to 67 and col. 29, lines 60-65 and there is a second path from fiber to the feed through epoxy 680 instead of lens 570 and to the diffuser 452 and where a second epoxy laminate can be the diffuser 425, 650)
Drummer discloses “...8 The LIDAR system of claim 7, wherein the detector is configured to generate the signal indicative of the presence of the obscurant based on modulation of the sensor beam by the modulator and the sensor beam received from the second optic. (see element 452)”. (see col. 26, lines 1-40 where the window can be obscured with dirt dust mud etc. and this can provide an increased in pulse duration/amplitude and then the window has an obscured element thereon)”.
Drummer discloses “...9. The LIDAR system of claim 1, wherein the detector comprises a photodiode array including a plurality of detector elements. (see receiver in FIG. 8 and also col. 26, lines 1-40 where the window can be obscured with dirt dust mud etc. and this can provide an increased in pulse duration/amplitude and then the window has an obscured element thereon)”.
Drummer discloses 10. The LIDAR sensor system of claim 9, wherein the plurality of detector elements are spaced along the second optic relative to the window such that light corresponding to the sensor beam is received by the plurality of detector elements (see col. 14, lines 35-37)”.
Drummer discloses 11. The LIDAR sensor system of claim 1, wherein the second light emitter and the
first optic are configured to provide the sensor beam into the window to span a cross-section of
the window (see col. 7, lines 50-55 and element 140 and fig 8 where the optical elements span the window 510 via elements 440 and 462 and 452).
PNG
media_image7.png
478
1256
media_image7.png
Greyscale
Drummer is silent but Walsh teaches “...12. The LID AR system of claim 1, wherein a first wavelength of the laser beam is the same as a second wavelength of the sensor beam. (See paragraph 26-33 where the device can use a second LIDAR device or a second array of lidar devices instead of splitting with a time multiplexed arrangement of the pulses)
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the present disclosure to combine the disclosure of DRUMMER with the teachings of WALSH to provide a second laser device. This can be a super bright white laser beam. See claims 1-6. To ensure registration, the illumination path is triggered within a short period of time of the LIDAR pulse, typically a microsecond, so as to effectively freeze the target scan motion. In this respect, the illumination source can be comparatively slow (microseconds rather than 100s picoseconds) to the advantage of not adding significantly to the (combined) accessible emission limit (AEL) and system laser classification. The full color LIDAR system 300 uses a “white” laser 302 as discussed above with respect to the FIG. 2 system 200. . This produces a plurality of time-separated or time-resolved wavelength-separated “color” pulse components. The time-resolved color pulse components are then recombined, preferably using a fiber-optic coupler-splitter (combiner) 308, for detection at a common detector 310, e.g. an ADP. By synchronization with multi-trigger timing electronics 312 and associated pulse intensity measurement circuitry (not shown), all of the spectral/color components can be detected and their arrival time, corrected from knowledge of the individual lengths of the fiber delay lines, recorded together with their relative intensity (image color). This can provide an improved accurate device. See claims 1-8 and paragraph 26-33.
Drummer discloses “...12. The LID AR system of claim 1, wherein a first wavelength of the laser beam is the
same as a second wavelength of the sensor beam.”. (see col. 26, lines 1-40 where the window can be obscured with dirt dust mud etc. and this can provide an increased in pulse duration/amplitude and then the window has an obscured element thereon)”.
Drummer is silent but Walsh teaches “… 13. The LID AR system of claim 1, wherein a first wavelength of the laser beam is different than a second wavelength of the sensor beam (See paragraph 26-33 where the device can use a second LIDAR device or a second array of lidar devices instead of splitting with a time multiplexed arrangement of the pulses)
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the present disclosure to combine the disclosure of DRUMMER with the teachings of WALSH to provide a second laser device. This can be a super bright white laser beam. See claims 1-6. To ensure registration, the illumination path is triggered within a short period of time of the LIDAR pulse, typically a microsecond, so as to effectively freeze the target scan motion. In this respect, the illumination source can be comparatively slow (microseconds rather than 100s picoseconds) to the advantage of not adding significantly to the (combined) accessible emission limit (AEL) and system laser classification. The full color LIDAR system 300 uses a “white” laser 302 as discussed above with respect to the FIG. 2 system 200. . This produces a plurality of time-separated or time-resolved wavelength-separated “color” pulse components. The time-resolved color pulse components are then recombined, preferably using a fiber-optic coupler-splitter (combiner) 308, for detection at a common detector 310, e.g. an ADP. By synchronization with multi-trigger timing electronics 312 and associated pulse intensity measurement circuitry (not shown), all of the spectral/color components can be detected and their arrival time, corrected from knowledge of the individual lengths of the fiber delay lines, recorded together with their relative intensity (image color). This can provide an improved accurate device. See claims 1-8 and paragraph 26-33.
Drummer discloses “…14. The LIDAR system of claim 1, wherein the detector is configured to generate the signal to indicate the presence of the obscurant based on a power of the sensor beam received by the detector. (see col. 26, lines 1-40 where the window can be obscured with dirt dust mud etc. and this can provide an increased in pulse duration/amplitude and then the window has an obscured element thereon)”.
Claims 15-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. sec. 103 as unpatentable as obvious in view of United States Patent No.: US 10 340 651 B1 to Drummer et al. that was filed on 2018 (hereinafter “Drummer”) and in view of Walsh.
PNG
media_image1.png
807
1098
media_image1.png
Greyscale
In regard to claim 15 and 20, Drummer discloses “...15. An autonomous vehicle, comprising: (see col. 11, line 1- to col. 12, line 16)
a LIDAR sensor system, comprising: : (see FIG. 8 where the lidar device include an internal window 510 and an output beam 125 to the target and has a receiver 140 and a light source emitter 110)
a window; (see FIG. 8 where the light source is connected to a splitter and collimator 440 and a ranging pulse is provided through the window 510 for an output beam to the target 130)
a first light emitter comprising a laser source configured to emit a laser beam of a first
wavelength; (see FIG. 10 to 11 where the light source has a seed laser with a pulse that is amplified by the amplifier 600 and for ranging pulse 462c)
one or more scanning optics configured to output the beam through the window; and(see FIG. 8 where the light source is connected to a splitter and collimator 440 and a ranging pulse is provided through the window 510 for an output beam to the target 130)
one or more processors configured to determine at least one of a range to an object or a velocity of the object based on reflection of the beam by the object; (see abstract) (see col. 11, lines 1-50)
a sensor, comprising: ; (see col. 4, lines 10-45 where the light source can be a pulsed or cw laser diode that can be amplified to a different amplification state and received by a sensor 140 to determine range)
Drummer is silent but Walsh teaches “…a second light emitter configured to output a sensor beam, wherein the second
light emitter is configured to output the sensor beam outside of a period of time in which the
laser beam from the laser source (See paragraph 26-33 where the device can use a second LIDAR device or a second array of lidar devices instead of splitting with a time multiplexed arrangement of the pulses)
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the present disclosure to combine the disclosure of DRUMMER with the teachings of WALSH to provide a second laser device. This can be a super bright white laser beam. See claims 1-6. To ensure registration, the illumination path is triggered within a short period of time of the LIDAR pulse, typically a microsecond, so as to effectively freeze the target scan motion. In this respect, the illumination source can be comparatively slow (microseconds rather than 100s picoseconds) to the advantage of not adding significantly to the (combined) accessible emission limit (AEL) and system laser classification. The full color LIDAR system 300 uses a “white” laser 302 as discussed above with respect to the FIG. 2 system 200. . This produces a plurality of time-separated or time-resolved wavelength-separated “color” pulse components. The time-resolved color pulse components are then recombined, preferably using a fiber-optic coupler-splitter (combiner) 308, for detection at a common detector 310, e.g. an ADP. By synchronization with multi-trigger timing electronics 312 and associated pulse intensity measurement circuitry (not shown), all of the spectral/color components can be detected and their arrival time, corrected from knowledge of the individual lengths of the fiber delay lines, recorded together with their relative intensity (image color). This can provide an improved accurate device. See claims 1-8 and paragraph 26-33.
Drummer discloses “…passes through the window; (see col. 4, lines 10-45 where the light source can be a pulsed or cw laser diode that can be amplified to a different amplification state)
a first optic coupled to the window, the first optic configured to receive the light from the light emitter and direct the light into the window at an angle relative to a surface of the window such that the light to undergoes total internal reflection in the window; (see FIG. 8 where the light can pass through the window 510 via an output beam 125 to the target 130 or alternatively some can pass back and be reflected inwards from the window as an internal scatter 520 and received by the diffuser 452 to an optical trigger signal to the receiver 140) (see col. 24, lines 1-65)
a second optic coupled to the window, the second optic configured to receive the light directed into the window by the first optic; and(see diffuser 452 that receives the scattered light from the window reflection and then can provide a second so called optical trigger signal to the receiver) (see col. 24, lines 1-65)
a detector configured to receive the light from the second optic and output a signal indicative of a presence of an obscurant on the window based on the light received from the second optic; (see col. 26, lines 1-25 where the window can be obscured with dirt dust mud etc. and this can provide an increased in pulse duration/amplitude and then the window has an obscured element thereon)
a steering system; a braking system; and a vehicle controller configured to control operation of at least one of the steering system or the braking system based on the at least one of the range or the velocity. (See col. 11, line 1- to col. 12, line 16)
Drummer is silent but Walsh teaches “...16. The autonomous vehicle of claim 15, wherein the second light emitter is
configured to output the sensor beam as output pulses on a periodic basis, wherein the output
pulses of the sensor beam do not overlap with the laser beam emitted by the first light emitter. (See paragraph 26-33 where the device can use a second LIDAR device or a second array of lidar devices instead of splitting with a time multiplexed arrangement of the pulses)
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the present disclosure to combine the disclosure of DRUMMER with the teachings of WALSH to provide a second laser device. This can be a super bright white laser beam. See claims 1-6. To ensure registration, the illumination path is triggered within a short period of time of the LIDAR pulse, typically a microsecond, so as to effectively freeze the target scan motion. In this respect, the illumination source can be comparatively slow (microseconds rather than 100s picoseconds) to the advantage of not adding significantly to the (combined) accessible emission limit (AEL) and system laser classification. The full color LIDAR system 300 uses a “white” laser 302 as discussed above with respect to the FIG. 2 system 200. . This produces a plurality of time-separated or time-resolved wavelength-separated “color” pulse components. The time-resolved color pulse components are then recombined, preferably using a fiber-optic coupler-splitter (combiner) 308, for detection at a common detector 310, e.g. an ADP. By synchronization with multi-trigger timing electronics 312 and associated pulse intensity measurement circuitry (not shown), all of the spectral/color components can be detected and their arrival time, corrected from knowledge of the individual lengths of the fiber delay lines, recorded together with their relative intensity (image color). This can provide an improved accurate device. See claims 1-8 and paragraph 26-33.
Drummer is silent but Walsh teaches “...17. The autonomous vehicle of claim 15, wherein the sensor comprises a plurality of
second emitters respectively configured to output a plurality of sensor beams (See claims 1-7 and paragraph 26-33 where the device can use a second LIDAR device or a second array of lidar devices instead of splitting with a time multiplexed arrangement of the pulses)
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the present disclosure to combine the disclosure of DRUMMER with the teachings of WALSH to provide a second laser device. This can be a super bright white laser beam. See claims 1-6. To ensure registration, the illumination path is triggered within a short period of time of the LIDAR pulse, typically a microsecond, so as to effectively freeze the target scan motion. In this respect, the illumination source can be comparatively slow (microseconds rather than 100s picoseconds) to the advantage of not adding significantly to the (combined) accessible emission limit (AEL) and system laser classification. The full color LIDAR system 300 uses a “white” laser 302 as discussed above with respect to the FIG. 2 system 200. . This produces a plurality of time-separated or time-resolved wavelength-separated “color” pulse components. The time-resolved color pulse components are then recombined, preferably using a fiber-optic coupler-splitter (combiner) 308, for detection at a common detector 310, e.g. an ADP. By synchronization with multi-trigger timing electronics 312 and associated pulse intensity measurement circuitry (not shown), all of the spectral/color components can be detected and their arrival time, corrected from knowledge of the individual lengths of the fiber delay lines, recorded together with their relative intensity (image color). This can provide an improved accurate device. See claims 1-8 and paragraph 26-33.
Drummer discloses “...18. The autonomous vehicle of claim 15, wherein the detector comprises a
photodiode array including a plurality of detector elements. (see Col. 2, lines 1-25).
PNG
media_image6.png
719
1051
media_image6.png
Greyscale
Drummer discloses “...19. The autonomous vehicle of claim 18, wherein the plurality of detector elements
are spaced along the second optic relative to the window such that light corresponding to the
sensor beam is received by the plurality of detector elements. (see FIG. 12 and 13 where the light source is emitted through the window 100 and then hits the target and then comes back as an input beam 135 to an epoxy input lens 680 and 570 to the APD and diffuser have a different property 452 to the optical trigger; see element 680 as having an epoxy and col. 28 line 50 to 67 and col. 29, lines 60-65 and there is a second path from fiber to the feed through epoxy 680 instead of lens 570 and to the diffuser 452 and where a second epoxy laminate can be the diffuser 425, 650)
Double Patenting
The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory double patenting rejection is appropriate where the conflicting claims are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969).
A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on nonstatutory double patenting provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with the examined application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. See MPEP § 717.02 for applications subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA as explained in MPEP § 2159. See MPEP §§ 706.02(l)(1) - 706.02(l)(3) for applications not subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b).
The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The filing date of the application in which the form is filed determines what form (e.g., PTO/SB/25, PTO/SB/26, PTO/AIA /25, or PTO/AIA /26) should be used. A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to www.uspto.gov/patents/process/file/efs/guidance/eTD-info-I.jsp.
Claims 1-20 are rejected under obviousness double patenting in view of claim 1-20 of U.S. Patent No.: 12422562 that recites all of the same elements with the exception of a second laser emitter.
The only difference is in claim of the present claims it recites two emitters instead of splitting the beam. This is obvious and a duplication of parts and therefore the double patenting rejection is made. It would have been obvious to add a colored laser to obtain additional information from the colors that can provide hints of the range to confirm the analysis.
The claims are otherwise identical.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JEAN PAUL CASS whose telephone number is (571)270-1934. The examiner can normally be reached Monday to Friday 7 am to 7 pm; Saturday 10 am to 12 noon.
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, Scott A. Browne can be reached on 571-270-0151. 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.
/JEAN PAUL CASS/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3668
Prosecution Insights