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 .
Response to Amendment
The Amendment filed on February 6, 2026 has been entered. Claim(s) 12 has/have been canceled and no claim(s) has/have been added. Therefore, claim(s) 1-11 and 13-20 remain(s) pending in the application with claims 3, 9 and 17-20 withdrawn from consideration.
Claim Objections
Claim(s) 1-2 and 4-8 is/are objected to because of the following informalities:
With respect to claim 1, in line 18 of the claim “fist” should read “first”. Claims 2 and 4-8 which either directly or indirectly depend form claim 1 and which inherit issue of claim 1 are objected to for similar reasons.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claim(s) 1-2, 4-8, 10-11, and 13-16 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
With respect to claim 1, as currently amended the claim requires that “a first side surface of the first material and a second side surface of the of the first materials resulting in a matching of an electrical length”. It is unclear from the claim language, however, to what and of what the electrical length is being matched. Review of the specification, and in particular paragraphs [0034]-[0037] of the specification as published, suggests that a dielectric insert (i.e. first material 115, Fig. 1B) is formed under a second conductive trace (e.g. 110, Fig. 1B), between the second conductive trace and a ground plane (125b, Fig. 1B) in order to match the electrical length of the second conductive trace to the electrical length of a first conductive trace (105, Fig. 1B). Accordingly, for purpose of compact prosecution, it will be assumed a length of a first material formed under a first conductive trace, between the first conductive trace and a first ground plane, and sharing an interface with a first entirety of a first surface of the first conductive trace allows to match the electrical length of the first conductive trace to the electrical length of a second conductive trace. Claims 2, and 4-8, which either directly or indirectly depend from claim 1 and which inherit issues of claim 1 are rejected for similar reason.
With respect to claim 10, as currently present the claim further requires that “a first side surface of the dielectric insert being aligned to a second side surface of the first conductive trace to match an electrical length”. It is unclear from the claim language, however, to what and of what the electrical length is being matched. Review of the specification, and in particular paragraphs [0034]-[0037] of the specification as published, suggests that a dielectric insert (i.e. first material 115, Fig. 1B) is formed under a second conductive trace (e.g. 110, Fig. 1B), between the second conductive trace and a ground plane (125b, Fig. 1B) in order to match the electrical length of the second conductive trace to the electrical length of a first conductive trace (105, Fig. 1B). Accordingly, for purpose of compact prosecution, it will be assumed that an electrical length of a first conductive trace can be matched to an electrical length of a second conductive trace by aligning side surfaces of a dielectric insert with side surfaces of the first conductive trace so that side surfaces of the dielectric insert and the side surfaces of the first conductive trace are coplanar. Claims 11, and 13-16, which either directly or indirectly depend from claim 10 and which inherit issues of claim 10 are rejected for similar reason.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed on February 6, 2026 have been fully considered and are persuasive with respect to rejection of claim 10 under 35 U.S.C. § 103. However, they are not persuasive with respect to rejections of claims 1 and 10 under 35 U.S.C. § 112(b), which have been either maintain and/or newly rejections made in view of the amendments, for the reasons stated above.
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 ANETA B CIESLEWICZ whose telephone number is 303-297-4232. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8:30 AM - 2:30 PM.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Sue Purvis can be reached at 571-272-1236. 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.
/A.B.C/Examiner, Art Unit 2893
/SUE A PURVIS/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2893
Prosecution Insights