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 .
Claim Objections
Claim 2 is objected to because of the following informalities:
“The radome” in claim 2, line 1 should read as “A radome”.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claims 16-17 are objected to under 37 CFR 1.75 as being substantial duplicates of claim 15. When two claims in an application are duplicates or else are so close in content that they both cover the same thing, despite a slight difference in wording, it is proper after allowing one claim to object to the other as being a substantial duplicate of the allowed claim. See MPEP § 608.01(m).
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 4-5, 7-8, and 19-20 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.
Claim 4 recites the limitation "a CNT resistive heating layer" in line 2. It is unclear if this limitation is claimed in addition to “a resistive heating layer” in claim 1 or further limits the material comprising “a resistive heating layer” in claim 1. The instant specification discloses “a resistive heating element disposed on the substrate comprising alternating positive and negative electric leads coated by a CNT resistive heating layer” (pg. 1, lines 10-11). For the purposes of examination, "a CNT resistive heating layer" will be interpreted as referring to the “resistive heating layer” of claim 1.
Claims 5 and 7-8 are similarly objected to for depending on and failing to cure the deficiencies of claim 4.
Claim 19 recites the limitation “alternated (or interdigitated)” in line 4. This limitation renders the claim indefinite because it is unclear if “interdigitated” is recited as a synonym for “alternated” and encompasses the same scope or if “interdigitated” introduces an alternative limitation.
Claim 20 is similarly objected to for depending on and failing to cure the deficiencies of claim 19.
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 1-2 and 10-11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Choi et al. (US 20250141114 A1), hereinafter Choi, further in view of Zhang et al. (CN 105873246 A), hereinafter Zhang.
Regarding claim 1, Choi teaches a resistive heater system (layers 12 and 13, Figs. 1-2B), comprising: a substrate (insulating layer 13, Fig. 2A); a resistive heating element (heating layer 12, Figs. 2A, 3A) disposed on the substrate (Fig. 2A shows 12 disposed on 13) comprising a plurality of… concentric… electric leads (“current may flow” [0067] through wires 121 that have “concentric circular shapes” [0068]) coated by a resistive heating layer (reflective layer 11, Fig. 2A).
Choi does not teach a plurality of electric leads are alternating,… positive and negative.
Zhang relates to planar, electrode-based resistive heating elements and teaches a plurality of electric leads are alternating (“comb teeth of the positive electrode conductive strip 123 are placed in the gaps between the comb teeth of the negative electrode conductive strip 124” [0111], Fig. 5),… positive (“positive” [0111]) and negative (“negative” [0111]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the resistive heating element of Choi to have the alternating positive and negative leads of Zhang in order to “improve… the uniformity of the heating effect” [0030], as identified by Zhang.
Regarding claim 2, Choi and Zhang teaches the radome (reflector 1, Fig. 1; Choi) comprising the resistive heater system of claim 1 (see rejection of claim 1 above).
A radome is defined as “a domelike shell transparent to radio-frequency radiation, used to house a radar antenna”1 or “a protective housing for a radar antenna made from a material that is transparent to radio waves”2. Here, a radome is understood to refer to the latter definition.
Regarding claim 10, Choi and Zhang teach the resistive heater system of claim 1 (see rejection of claim 1 above) comprising at least 3 concentric positive leads (comb teeth of the positive electrode conductive strip 123 may be “any wiring that can achieve the alternating arrangement of positive and negative electrodes and presents a spiral structure can be used” [0109], Fig. 5; Zhang) alternating with at least 3 concentric negative leads (comb teeth of the negative electrode conductive strip 124 may be “any wiring that can achieve the alternating arrangement of positive and negative electrodes and presents a spiral structure can be used” [0109], Fig. 5; Zhang)
Regarding claim 11, Choi and Zhang teaches the resistive heater system of claim 10 (see rejection of claim 10 above) wherein the at least 3 concentric leads (“comb teeth of the positive electrode conductive strip 123” [0111], Fig. 5; Zhang) share a common first lead (teeth of positive strip 123 are connected to shared lead stemming from positive power input point 121, Fig. 5; Zhang) and wherein the at least 3 concentric negative leads (“comb teeth of the negative electrode conductive strip 124” [0111], Fig. 5; Zhang) share a common second lead (teeth of negative strip 124 are connected to shared lead stemming from negative power input point 122, Fig. 5; Zhang).
Claim 3 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Choi et al. (US 20250141114 A1), hereinafter Choi, further in view of Zhang et al. (CN 105873246 A), hereinafter Zhang, and Imai (US 20100026607 A1).
Regarding claim 3, Choi and Zhang teaches the resistive heater system of claim 1 (see rejection of claim 1 above) comprising a radio or infrared transmitter or receiver or transceiver (transceiver 2, Fig. 1; Choi)… the resistive heater system (layers 12 and 13, Figs. 1-2B; Choi).
Modified Choi does not teach the transceiver being at least partly housed within.
Imai relates to radio transmitter/receiver systems within radomes and teaches a transceiver being at least partly housed within (“transmitter 52 or the receiver 53 may be located on the table 8” [0054] which is covered by radome 19 in Fig. 7).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the transceiver of Modified Choi to be located within a housing/system in order to reduce the size of a radar apparatus [0054], as identified by Imai.
Claims 4-5, 12-13, and 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Choi et al. (US 20250141114 A1), hereinafter Choi, further in view of Zhang et al. (CN 105873246 A), hereinafter Zhang, and Burton et al. (US 20140070054 A1), hereinafter Burton.
Regarding claim 4, Choi and Zhang teaches the resistive heater system of claim 1 (see rejection of claim 1 above).
While Modified Choi teaches wherein the resistive heating element (heating layer 12, Figs. 2A, 3A; Choi) comprises a… resistive heating layer (reflective layer 11 may include “carbon-fiber-reinforced plastic” [0042], Fig. 2A; Choi), Modified Choi does not teach a CNT resistive heating layer.
Burton relates to planar, carbon-based resistive heating layers and teaches a CNT resistive heating layer (CNT heater layer 1640, Fig. 16).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the resistive heating layer of Modified Choi to comprise CNT in order to obtain the predictable result of generating heat.
Regarding claim 5, Choi, Zhang, and Burton teach the resistive heater system of claim 4 (see rejection of claim 4 above) wherein the CNT (CNT heater layer 1640, Fig. 16; Burton) resistive heating layer (reflective layer 11, Fig. 2A; Choi) has a thickness in the range of 15 to 200 nm (“0.005 .mu.m to 100 .mu.m” [0074] encompasses 15-200 nm as 1 mu.m. equals 1000 nm; Burton) and a resistance of 100 to 400 ohm/sq (“CNT layers have many contacts between CNTs and good conductivity that is, a resistivity less than 0.05 .OMEGA.cm, preferably less than 0.002 .OMEGA.cm. The sheet resistance of this layer should be less than 500 .OMEGA./square, preferably less than 200 .OMEGA./square, more preferably less than 50 .OMEGA./square” [0085]; Burton).
Regarding claim 12, Choi teaches a resistive heater system (layers 12 and 13, Figs. 1-2B) comprising: a substrate (insulating layer 13, Fig. 2A); a resistive heating element (heating layer 12, Figs. 2A, 3A) disposed on the substrate (Fig. 2A shows 12 disposed on 13) comprising… electric leads (“current may flow” [0067] through wires 121 that have “concentric circular shapes” [0068]) coated by a CNT resistive heating layer (reflective layer 11 may include “carbon-fiber-reinforced plastic” [0042], Fig. 2A).
Choi teaches electric leads but does not teach alternating positive and negative electric leads… having a thickness in the range of 15 to 200 nm, and a resistance of 100 to 400 ohm/sq.
Zhang relates to planar, electrode-based resistive heating elements and teaches alternating (“comb teeth of the positive electrode conductive strip 123 are placed in the gaps between the comb teeth of the negative electrode conductive strip 124” [0111], Fig. 5) positive (“positive” [0111]) and negative (“negative” [0111]) electric leads (123, 124).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the resistive heating element of Choi to have the alternating positive and negative leads of Zhang in order to “improve… the uniformity of the heating effect” [0030], as identified by Zhang.
While Modified Choi teaches a resistive heating layer (reflective layer 11, Fig. 2A; Choi), Modified Choi does not teach a CNT resistive heating layer having a thickness in the range of 15 to 200 nm, and a resistance of 100 to 400 ohm/sq.
Burton relates to planar, carbon-based resistive heating layers and teaches a CNT resistive heating layer (CNT heater layer 1640, Fig. 16) has a thickness in the range of 15 to 200 nm (“0.005 .mu.m to 100 .mu.m” [0074] encompasses 15-200 nm as 1 mu.m. equals 1000 nm; Burton), and a resistance of 100 to 400 ohm/sq (“CNT layers…The sheet resistance of this layer should be less than 500 .OMEGA./square, preferably less than 200 .OMEGA./square, more preferably less than 50 .OMEGA./square” [0085]; Burton).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the resistive heating layer of Modified Choi to comprise CNT in order to obtain the predictable result of generating heat.
Regarding claim 13, Choi, Zhang, and Burton teach the resistive heater system of claim 12 (see rejection of claim 12 above) wherein the CNT (CNT heater layer 1640, Fig. 16; Burton) resistive heating layer (reflective layer 11, Fig. 2A; Choi) has a thickness in the range of 15 to 100 nm (“0.005 .mu.m to 100 .mu.m” [0074] encompasses 15-100 nm as 1 mu.m. equals 1000 nm; Burton).
Regarding claim 18, Choi, Zhang, and Burton teach the resistive heater system of claim 12 (see rejection of claim 12 above) comprising at least 3 positive leads (“comb teeth of the positive electrode conductive strip 123” [0111], Fig. 5; Zhang) that share a common first lead (teeth of positive strip 123 are connected to shared lead stemming from positive power input point 121, Fig. 5; Zhang) and at least 3 negative leads (“comb teeth of the negative electrode conductive strip 124” [0111], Fig. 5; Zhang) that share a common second lead (teeth of negative strip 124 are connected to shared lead stemming from negative power input point 122, Fig. 5; Zhang).
Claims 6 and 9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Choi et al. (US 20250141114 A1), hereinafter Choi, further in view of Zhang et al. (CN 105873246 A), hereinafter Zhang, and Hiramatsu et al. (US 20030098299 A1), hereinafter Hiramatsu.
Regarding claim 6, Choi and Zhang teach the resistive heater system of claim 1 (see rejection of claim 1 above).
Modified Choi teaches the resistive heating element (heating layer 12, Figs. 2A, 3A; Choi), but does not teach wherein the resistive heating element is at least 70% transparent in the wavelength range of one or any combination of 1 to 4 GHz, or 1 to 10 GHz, or 2 to 18 GHz, or from 4 to 16 GHz, or in the L Band, S Band, C Band, X Band, and/or Ku Band.
However, Choi teaches a heating wire portion 120 may include heating wires 121 “through which currents may flow” [0067] as part of heating layer 12. Choi does not disclose the material said heating wires are composed of. Hiramatsu relates to planar, wire-based resistive heating elements and teaches “metal wire may be used” as “resistance heating elements” [0082]. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the heating wire portion of Modified Choi to comprise metal in order to obtain the predictable result of effectively generating heat through electrical resistance.
Choi, Zhang, and Hiramatsu do not explicitly disclose wherein the resistive heating element is at least 70% transparent in the wavelength range of one or any combination of 1 to 4 GHz, or 1 to 10 GHz, or 2 to 18 GHz, or from 4 to 16 GHz, or in the L Band, S Band, C Band, X Band, and/or Ku Band. However, Hiramatsu discloses metal wires [0082]. The instant specification discloses that “leads can be any conductive materials, preferably a metallic wire or metallic braid” (pg. 3, lines 26-27) and “Preferably, the resistive heater layer (and preferably including substrate and leads) is RF transparent such that the heater exhibits a loss of 5 dB or less from one or any combination of 1 to 4 GHz, or 1 to 10 GHz, or 2 to 18 GHz, or from 4 to 16 GHz, or in the L Band, S Band, C Band, X Band, and/or Ku Band.” (pg. 6, lines 1-4). The courts have held that "Products of identical chemical composition can not have mutually exclusive properties." In re Spada, 911 F.2d 705, 709, 15 USPQ2d 1655, 1658 (Fed. Cir. 1990). As the prior art teaches the identical chemical structure (i.e., a metal), the properties applicant claims are necessarily present. See MPEP § 2112.01(II).
Regarding claim 9, Choi, Zhang, and Hiramatsu teaches the resistive heater system of claim 6 (see rejection of claim 6 above) wherein resistive heater system (heating layer 12, Figs. 2A, 3A; Choi) maintains at least 80% transparency in the wavelength range of 4 to 16 GHz (“metal wires” that may be used as “resistance heating elements” [0082] are identical to instant application’s structure and thus are construed as meeting transparency limitation in given range; Hiramatsu) while constant current is passed through the system (“heating wire portion 120 may include heating wires 121 through which currents may flow” [0067]; Choi) to generate heat (“heat may be generated” [0067]; Choi) sufficient to melt a 3 mm thick ice layer from the surface of the system (“reflector 1… may thus melt the accumulated snow S or ice S” [0038]. In some timeframe, 3 mm of an ice layer may be melted; Choi) in an ambient atmosphere maintained at -20 °C (“a region with low snowfall and extremely cold temperatures” [0045]; Choi).
Claims 7-8 and 14-17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Choi et al. (US 20250141114 A1), hereinafter Choi, further in view of Zhang et al. (CN 105873246 A), hereinafter Zhang, Burton et al. (US 20140070054 A1), hereinafter Burton, and Hiramatsu et al. (US 20030098299 A1), hereinafter Hiramatsu.
Regarding claim 7, Choi, Zhang, and Burton teach the resistive heater system of claim 5 (see rejection of claim 5 above).
Modified Choi teaches the resistive heating element (heating layer 12, Figs. 2A, 3A; Choi) but does not teach wherein the resistive heating element is at least 70% transparent in the wavelength range of one or any combination of 1 to 4 GHz, or 1 to 10 GHz, or 2 to 18 GHz, or from 4 to 16 GHz, or in the L Band, S Band, C Band, X Band, and/or Ku Band.
However, Choi teaches a heating wire portion 120 may include heating wires 121 “through which currents may flow” [0067] as part of heating layer 12. Choi does not disclose the material said heating wires are composed of. Hiramatsu relates to planar, wire-based resistive heating elements and teaches “metal wire may be used” as “resistance heating elements” [0082]. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the heating wire portion of Modified Choi to comprise metal in order to obtain the predictable result of effectively generating heat through electrical resistance.
Choi, Zhang, and Hiramatsu do not explicitly disclose wherein the resistive heating element is at least 70% transparent in the wavelength range of one or any combination of 1 to 4 GHz, or 1 to 10 GHz, or 2 to 18 GHz, or from 4 to 16 GHz, or in the L Band, S Band, C Band, X Band, and/or Ku Band. However, Hiramatsu discloses metal wires [0082]. The instant specification discloses that “leads can be any conductive materials, preferably a metallic wire or metallic braid” (pg. 3, lines 26-27) and “Preferably, the resistive heater layer (and preferably including substrate and leads) is RF transparent such that the heater exhibits a loss of 5 dB or less from one or any combination of 1 to 4 GHz, or 1 to 10 GHz, or 2 to 18 GHz, or from 4 to 16 GHz, or in the L Band, S Band, C Band, X Band, and/or Ku Band.” (pg. 6, lines 1-4). The courts have held that "Products of identical chemical composition can not have mutually exclusive properties." In re Spada, 911 F.2d 705, 709, 15 USPQ2d 1655, 1658 (Fed. Cir. 1990). As the prior art teaches the identical chemical structure (i.e., a metal), the properties applicant claims are necessarily present. See MPEP § 2112.01(II).
Regarding claim 8, Choi, Zhang, Burton, and Hiramatsu teach the resistive heater system of claim 7 (see rejection of claim 7 above) wherein resistive heater system (heating layer 12, Figs. 2A, 3A; Choi) maintains at least 70% transparency (“metal wires” that may be used as “resistance heating elements” [0082] are identical to instant application’s structure and thus are construed as meeting transparency limitation; Hiramatsu) while constant current is passed through the system (“heating wire portion 120 may include heating wires 121 through which currents may flow” [0067]; Choi) to generate heat (“heat may be generated” [0067]; Choi) sufficient to melt a 3 mm thick ice layer from the surface of the system (“reflector 1… may thus melt the accumulated snow S or ice S” [0038]. In some timeframe, 3 mm of an ice layer may be melted; Choi) in an ambient atmosphere maintained at -20 °C (“a region with low snowfall and extremely cold temperatures” [0045]; Choi).
Regarding claim 14, Choi, Zhang, and Burton teach the resistive heater system of claim 12 (see rejection of claim 12 above)
Modified Choi teaches the resistive heating element (heating layer 12, Figs. 2A, 3A; Choi), but does not teach wherein the resistive heating element is at least 70% transparent in the wavelength range of one or any combination of 1 to 4 GHz, or 1 to 10 GHz, or 2 to 18 GHz, or from 4 to 16 GHz, or in the L Band, S Band, C Band, X Band, and/or Ku Band.
However, Choi teaches a heating wire portion 120 may include heating wires 121 “through which currents may flow” [0067] as part of heating layer 12. Choi does not disclose the material said heating wires are composed of. Hiramatsu relates to planar, wire-based resistive heating elements and teaches “metal wire may be used” as “resistance heating elements” [0082]. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the heating wire portion of Modified Choi to comprise metal in order to obtain the predictable result of effectively generating heat through electrical resistance.
Choi, Zhang, and Hiramatsu do not explicitly disclose wherein the resistive heating element is at least 70% transparent in the wavelength range of one or any combination of 1 to 4 GHz, or 1 to 10 GHz, or 2 to 18 GHz, or from 4 to 16 GHz, or in the L Band, S Band, C Band, X Band, and/or Ku Band. However, Hiramatsu discloses metal wires [0082]. The instant specification discloses that “leads can be any conductive materials, preferably a metallic wire or metallic braid” (pg. 3, lines 26-27) and “Preferably, the resistive heater layer (and preferably including substrate and leads) is RF transparent such that the heater exhibits a loss of 5 dB or less from one or any combination of 1 to 4 GHz, or 1 to 10 GHz, or 2 to 18 GHz, or from 4 to 16 GHz, or in the L Band, S Band, C Band, X Band, and/or Ku Band.” (pg. 6, lines 1-4). The courts have held that "Products of identical chemical composition can not have mutually exclusive properties." In re Spada, 911 F.2d 705, 709, 15 USPQ2d 1655, 1658 (Fed. Cir. 1990). As the prior art teaches the identical chemical structure (i.e., a metal), the properties applicant claims are necessarily present. See MPEP § 2112.01(II).
Regarding claim 15, Choi, Zhang, Burton, and Hiramatsu teach the resistive heater system of claim 14 (see rejection of claim 14 above) wherein resistive heater system (heating layer 12, Figs. 2A, 3A; Choi) maintains at least 70% transparency (“metal wires” that may be used as “resistance heating elements” [0082] are identical to instant application’s structure and thus are construed as meeting transparency limitation; Hiramatsu) while constant current is passed through the system (“heating wire portion 120 may include heating wires 121 through which currents may flow” [0067]; Choi) to generate heat (“heat may be generated” [0067]; Choi) sufficient to melt a 3mm thick ice layer from the surface of the system (“reflector 1… may thus melt the accumulated snow S or ice S” [0038]. In some timeframe, 3 mm of an ice layer may be melted; Choi) in an ambient atmosphere maintained at -20 °C (“a region with low snowfall and extremely cold temperatures” [0045]; Choi).
Regarding claim 16, Choi, Zhang, Burton, and Hiramatsu teaches the resistive heater system of claim 14 (see rejection of claim 14 above) wherein resistive heater system (heating layer 12, Figs. 2A, 3A; Choi) maintains at least 70% transparency (“metal wires” that may be used as “resistance heating elements” [0082] are identical to instant application’s structure and thus are construed as meeting transparency limitation; Hiramatsu) while constant current is passed through the system (“heating wire portion 120 may include heating wires 121 through which currents may flow” [0067]; Choi) to generate heat (“heat may be generated” [0067]; Choi) sufficient to melt a 3 mm thick ice layer from the surface of the system (“reflector 1… may thus melt the accumulated snow S or ice S” [0038]. In some timeframe, 3 mm of an ice layer may be melted; Choi) in an ambient atmosphere maintained at -20 °C (“a region with low snowfall and extremely cold temperatures” [0045]; Choi).
Regarding claim 17, Choi, Zhang, Burton, and Hiramatsu teaches the resistive heater system of claim 14 (see rejection of claim 14 above) wherein resistive heater system (heating layer 12, Figs. 2A, 3A; Choi) maintains at least 70% transparency (“metal wires” that may be used as “resistance heating elements” [0082] are identical to instant application’s structure and thus are construed as meeting transparency limitation; Hiramatsu) while constant current is passed through the system (“heating wire portion 120 may include heating wires 121 through which currents may flow” [0067]; Choi) to generate heat (“heat may be generated” [0067]; Choi) sufficient to melt a 3 mm thick ice layer from the surface of the system (“reflector 1… may thus melt the accumulated snow S or ice S” [0038]. In some timeframe, 3 mm of an ice layer may be melted; Choi) in an ambient atmosphere maintained at -20 °C (“a region with low snowfall and extremely cold temperatures” [0045]; Choi).
Claims 19-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zhang et al. (CN 105873246 A), hereinafter Zhang, further in view of Choi et al. (US 20250141114 A1), hereinafter Choi.
Regarding claim 19, Zhang teaches a polarizable (“comb-shaped” [0111])) resistive heater system (“heating element of the electrothermal film D” [0080], Fig. 5), comprising: a substrate (heating substrate layer 110, Fig. 1); a resistive heating element (positive conductive strip 123 and the negative conductive strip 124, Fig. 2) disposed on the substrate (see Figs. 1-2) comprising a comb-like structure of positive and negative electric leads (“comb teeth of the positive electrode conductive strip 123 are placed in the gaps between the comb teeth of the negative electrode conductive strip 124” [0111], Fig. 5) wherein the comb-like structure comprises a series of at least 3 positive electric leads alternated (or interdigitated) with at least 3 negative electric leads (“comb teeth of the positive electrode conductive strip 123 are placed in the gaps between the comb teeth of the negative electrode conductive strip 124” [0111], Fig. 5).
While Zhang teaches a resistive heating element, Zhang does not teach a resistive heating element coated by a resistive heating layer.
Choi relates to layer coatings for wire-based resistive heating elements for antennas and teaches a resistive heating element (wires 121 of heating layer 12, Fig. 2A) coated by a resistive heating layer (reflective layer 11 covers resistive heating wires 121, Fig. 2A).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the resistive heater of Zhang to be covered by a resistive heating layer in order to “minimize the thermal deformation of the reflective layer” even “even when the temperature of the reflective layer increases due to heat transferred from the heating layer 12” [0043], as identified by Choi.
Regarding claim 20, Zhang and Choi teach the polarizable resistive heater system of claim 19 (see rejection of claim 19 above) wherein the positive leads (“comb teeth of the positive electrode conductive strip 123” [0111], Fig. 5; Zhang) share a common first lead (teeth of positive strip 123 are connected to shared lead stemming from positive power input point 121, Fig. 5; Zhang) and the negative leads (“comb teeth of the negative electrode conductive strip 124” [0111], Fig. 5; Zhang) share a common second lead (teeth of negative strip 124 are connected to shared lead stemming from negative power input point 122, Fig. 5; Zhang).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Parkhe et al. (US 20160027678 A1) discloses a plurality of spatially tunable heaters arranged in concentric channels.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ALLISON HELFERTY whose telephone number is (571)272-1465. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 9:00-5:00.
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, STEVEN CRABB can be reached at (571) 270-5095. 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.H./ Examiner, Art Unit 3761
/JUSTIN C DODSON/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3761
1 "radome." American Heritage® Dictionary of the English Language, Fifth Edition. 2011. Houghton Mifflin Harcourt Publishing Company 16 Dec. 2025 <https://www.thefreedictionary.com/radome>
2 Collins English Dictionary – Complete and Unabridged, 12th Edition 2014. S.v. "radome." Retrieved December 16 2025 from <https://www.thefreedictionary.com/radome>