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 .
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed 3/18/2026 has been entered.
Response to Amendment
The amendment filed 3/18/2026 has been entered. Claims 1-3, 5-12, 14-28 remain pending in the application. Applicant’s amendment has overcome each and every objection and rejection of record set forth in the Final Office Action mailed 11/19/2025, which are hereby withdrawn.
Response to Argument
Applicant’s arguments, see pages 9-16 of the Remarks filed 3/18/2026, have been fully considered and found persuasive. However, the new objections and ground(s) of rejection(s) have been necessitated by the applicant's amendment as set forth below.
Claim Objections
Applicant is advised that should claim 27 be found allowable, claim 28 will be objected to under 37 CFR 1.75 as being a substantial duplicate thereof. 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).
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112(b)
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.
Claims 21-25 and 27-28 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor, or a joint inventor, regards as the invention.
Claims 21-22, as amended, recite in the last three lines: “the first series arm resonator is connected closer to one of the input terminal and the output terminal.”
It is unclear in comparison to which other element(s) the first series arm resonator is connected closer to one of the input terminal and the output terminal.
For examination purposes, this limitation will be understood to mean:
--the first series arm resonator is connected closer than the inductor to one of the input terminal and the output terminal--.
Claims 23-25 and 27-28 are also rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) as dependent on the rejected claim(s).
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112(d)
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(d):
(d) REFERENCE IN DEPENDENT FORMS.—Subject to subsection (e), a claim in dependent form shall contain a reference to a claim previously set forth and then specify a further limitation of the subject matter claimed. A claim in dependent form shall be construed to incorporate by reference all the limitations of the claim to which it refers.
Claims 26-28 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(d) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, 4th paragraph, as being of improper dependent form for failing to further limit the subject matter of the claim upon which it depends, or for failing to include all the limitations of the claim upon which it depends.
Claims 26-28 recite: “wherein the inductor is connected in series to a path connecting the first series arm resonator and the first parallel arm resonator.” However, claim 1, on which claim 26 depends, as well as claim 22, on which the claims 27 and 28 depend, already recite “an inductor is connected in series to the first series arm resonator between the first series arm resonator and the first parallel arm resonator.” The additional limitations recited in these dependent claims fail to further limit the subject matter of the claim(s) upon which they depend.
Applicant may cancel the claim(s), amend the claim(s) to place the claim(s) in proper dependent form, rewrite the claim(s) in independent form, or present a sufficient showing that the dependent claim(s) complies with the statutory requirements.
Appropriate correction is required.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 1-3, 5-12, 14-20 are allowed.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: applicant’s amendment of claim 1 overcomes the closest prior art references of Plesski (US 10,491,192), Satoh (US 5,559,481) and Nosaka (US 2019/0267970), all of record, by requiring the feature of “a resonance frequency generated by the inductor is higher than the anti-resonant frequency of the first series arm resonator,” in combination with the remaining limitations of the amended claim 1.
Claims 2-3, 5-12, 14-20 are allowable as dependent on the allowable claim 1.
Claims 21-28 would be allowable if rewritten to overcome the rejections under 35 U.S.C. 112 set forth in this Office action and to include all of the limitations of the base claim(s) and any intervening claims, as appropriate.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2012/0274416 A1, published 11/1/2012 (“Hara”) discloses a ladder filter including an inductor in series with the first series resonator having a resonance frequency higher than an anti-resonance frequency of the at least one series resonator (Fig. 6, ¶83).
U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2016/0149556 A1, published 5/26/2016 (“Kando”) discloses a tunable filter including an inductor in series with the first series resonator, wherein the inductor shifts the resonant frequency toward a lower frequency side (Fig. 1, ¶65).
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to VICTOR COLE, telephone number (571) 272-4686. The examiner can be reached Monday-Friday, 9AM-5PM ET.
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 www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, ANDREA LINDGREN BALTZELL, can be reached at (571) 272-5918. 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 www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/patent-center for more information about Patent Center and 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.
/VICTOR COLE/
Examiner, Art Unit 2843
/ANDREA LINDGREN BALTZELL/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2843