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 .
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 03/16/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Regarding claim 22 with reference to the Zimmerman and Focke references, Applicant argues;
[Claim 22 is amended herein to specify that a first anisotropic lens is moveable with respect to a second anisotropic lens and a first element, and the first element is positioned to pass a first output beam sequentially through the first lens and the second lens.
The Applicant submits that this combination is non-obvious over Zimmerman and Focke. In Zimmerman there is only a single lens, and the elements are moveable with respect to the single lens. In Focke, there are multiple element / lens sets, and each of the lens sets is moveable with respect to other lens sets. But there is no teaching, suggestion, or motivation the with a given element /lens set, one of the lenses is moveable with respect to the element.
Focke [0090] As shown in FIGS. 1-3, each radiating element is positioned with respect to its associated RF lens in the same manner that the other radiating elements are positioned
with respect to their associated RF lenses when, for example, the radiating elements are designed to effect a mechanical downtilt. However, in further embodiments, each combination of a radiating element and its associated lens may be moved or aimed
independently of the other radiating element/ lens combinations to effect the radiation properties of the antenna.]
The Examiner respectfully disagrees,
The claims are interpreted using the broadest reasonable interpretation. Under this interpretation the Examiner asserts that the skilled artisan recognizes that paragraph [0090] of Zimmerman reference, not a secondary reference Focke, discloses that the lens and the element/radiating element movable with respect to each other. Furthermore, figure 3 discloses two rows of lens 130 and two rows of element/radiating element of 120. In this case, a Person Having Ordinary Skill in The Art, PHOSITA, would recognize that paragraph [0090] teaches that each elements movable with respect to other element. For instance, one lens row with respect to another lens row and/or with respect to one row of radiating element and vice versa.
Applicant further argues that:
[No new matter is added. Figure 15 shows two anisotropic cylindrical lenses in which each of the lenses a lens can be rotated.
[0075] Figure 15 depicts a phased array antenna 1500 that includes multiple radiating elements 1501, 1505, 1510, 1515, in front of which are positioned multiple cylindrical anisotropic lenses, one with its DK oriented in the X direction 1501X, 1505X, 1510X,1515X, and another in the Y direction 1501Y, 1505Y, 1510Y, 1515Y. The lenses can be rotated along their long axes in order to adjust the resultant beamwidth, rotation of the 1501Y, 1505Y, 1510Y, 1515Y lenses to adjust horizontal beam width, and rotation of the 1501X, 1505X, 1510X, 1515X lenses to adjust the vertical beamwidth (not shown).
Independent rotation of the lenses is supported in Specification para [0079].
[0079] Figure 18 depicts a configuration similar to that of Figure 17, which includes a large isotropic lens 1751 used in conjunction with multiple, smaller anisotropic lenses
1755A, 1755B, 1755C and radiating elements 1460A, 1760B, 1760C. Here, a controller (not shown) is configured to independently or simultaneously rotate lenses 1755A, 1755B, 1755C to adjust resultant beam parameters of an antenna.]
The Examiner respectfully disagrees,
In response to applicant's argument that the references fail to show certain features of the invention, it is noted that the features upon which applicant relies are not recited in the rejected claim(s). Although the claims are interpreted in light of the specification, limitations from the specification are not read into the claims. See In re Van Geuns, 988 F.2d 1181, 26 USPQ2d 1057 (Fed. Cir. 1993).
Claim Objections
Claim 40 is objected to because of the following informalities:
Applicant recites “wherein the first and second lenses are cylindrical lenses, and the first lens cylindrical lens is oriented parallel to the second cylindrical lens.” The limitation is unclear.
Appropriate correction is required.
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.
Claims 22-28, 30, 39, 40-42 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zimmerman et al. (US Pub. No. 2017/0062944, hereby referred as Zimmerman) in view of Focke et al. (US Pub. No. 2010/0231436, hereby referred as Focke).
Regarding claim 22,
Zimmerman discloses,
A communication system (figures 1-3), comprising:
first and second lenses moveable with respect to a first element, and the first lens is movable with respect to the second lens (lenses 130 or 230 and first element 120. See paragraphs [0090] and [0091] for disclosing that either lenses or the elements movable with regard to each other).
Zimmerman does not disclose,
first and second anisotropic lenses; and the first element positioned to pass a first output beam sequentially through the first lens and the second lens.
However, Focke teaches (figure 8),
first and second anisotropic lenses (lenses 18a and 18b, see paragraph [0004] for teaching anisotropic lens or dielectric material lens); and the first element positioned to pass a first output beam sequentially through the first lens and the second lens (see figure 8, element 30 and the beam to pass both lenses 18a and 18b OR element 36 to have a beam pass through both lenses 18a and 18b).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to incorporate first and second anisotropic lenses; and the first element positioned to pass a first output beam sequentially through the first lens and the second lens, as taught by Focke, into Zimmerman in order to provide a communication device that have the configuration of the antenna elements may be selected in such a way that different directional characteristics are achieved in the azimuth and in the elevation. And having relatively low costs for the device, in particular when a high-quality beam-shaping device is to be implemented which allows a symmetrical directional characteristic and good suppression of side lobes.
Regarding claim 23,
Zimmerman discloses (figures 1-3),
wherein the first lens is configured such that movement of the first lens with respect to the first element alters the first output beam with respect to at least one of a beamwidth, a beam-direction, a beam polarization, a beam gain, and a beam sidelobe level (lens 130/230 and element 120. See paragraphs [0090] and [0091]).
Regarding claim 24,
Zimmerman discloses (figures 1-3),
wherein the second lens is configured such that movement of the second lens with respect to a second element alters a second output beam with respect to at least one of a beamwidth, a beam-direction, a beam polarization, a beam gain, and a beam sidelobe level (lens 130/230 and element 120. See paragraphs [0090] and [0091]).
Regarding claim 25,
Zimmerman discloses (figures 1-3),
a third element that cooperates with the first lens to produce a third output beam that differs from the first output beam with respect to at least one of a beamwidth, a beam-direction, a beam polarization, a beam gain, and a beam sidelobe level (lens 130/230 and elements 120. See paragraphs [0090] and [0091]).
Regarding claim 26,
Zimmerman discloses (figures 1-3),
a fourth element that cooperates with the second lens to produce a fourth output
beam that differs from the first, second, and third output beams with respect to at least
one of a beamwidth, a beam-direction, a beam polarization, a beam gain, and a beam
sidelobe level (lens 130/230 and elements 120. See paragraphs [0090] and [0091]).
Regarding claim 27,
Zimmerman discloses (figures 1-3),
a first controller configured to operate a first mechanism that physically reorients
the first lens with respect to the second lens (lens 130/230 and element 120. See paragraphs [0090] and [0091] for teaching moving or orbiting around the lens and/or radiating element).
Regarding claim 28,
Zimmerman discloses (figures 1-3),
a first controller configured to operate at least one first mechanism that physically
reorients both the first and the second lens with respect to the first element (lens 130/230 and element 120. See paragraphs [0090] and [0091] for teaching moving or orbiting around the lens and/or radiating element).
Regarding claim 30,
Zimmerman discloses,
wherein the first element has different first and second polarizations (see figure 4
and paragraph [0085]).
Regarding claim 39,
Zimmerman discloses,
wherein the first and second lenses are cylindrical lenses, and the first lens is oriented orthogonally to the second lens (figure 2 and paragraph [0071], one lens is orthogonal to another lens when viewed from direction top to bottom or if viewed from vertical axis V1).
Regarding claim 40,
Zimmerman does not disclose,
wherein the first and second lenses are cylindrical lenses, and the first lens cylindrical lens is oriented parallel to the second cylindrical lens (see figures 2 and 3 for having two lenses in parallel to each other).
Regarding claim 41,
Zimmerman does not disclose,
wherein the first element positioned is positioned such that the first output beam
passes through cylindrical portions of the first and second lenses.
However, Focke teaches (figure 8),
wherein the first element positioned is positioned such that the first output beam
passes through cylindrical portions of the first and second lenses (element 30 and the
beam to pass both lenses 18a and 18b OR element 36 to have a beam pass through
both lenses 18a and 18b).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the
effective filing date of the invention to incorporate wherein the first element positioned is
positioned such that the first output beam passes through cylindrical portions of the first
and second lenses, as taught by Focke, into Zimmerman in order to provide a
communication device that has the configuration of the antenna elements may be
selected in such a way that different directional characteristics are achieved in the
azimuth and in the elevation. And having relatively low costs for the device, in particular
when a high-quality beam-shaping device is to be implemented which allows a
symmetrical directional characteristic and good suppression of side lobes.
Regarding claim 42,
Zimmerman discloses,
wherein the first and second lenses are independently moveable with respect to the first element (figures 1-3, lenses 130 or 230 and first element 120. See paragraphs [0090] and [0091] for disclosing that either lenses or the elements movable with regard to each other).
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to AWAT M SALIH whose telephone number is (571)270-5601. The examiner can normally be reached M-F: 8:30AM-5:00PM. 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, Dimary Lopez can be reached at (571)-270-7893. 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.
/AWAT M SALIH/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2845
Prosecution Insights