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 .
Information Disclosure Statement
Information Disclosure Statement The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 02/26/2026 is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Response to Amendment
The amendments filed on April 17th 2026 have been entered. Claims 16-35 are currently pending. Applicants’ amendments to the drawings and claims have overcome the objections set forth in the Non-Final Office Action mailed on January 15th 2026.
Claim Objections
Claim 16 is objected to because of the following informalities:
Claim 16 – “A patch above the dielectric material” should be corrected to ”A patch above the dielectric foam material”.
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.
Claim(s) 1-5, and 10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Franson et al. (US 20250062527 A1) in view of Fink et al. (US 6903687 B1) and Yamada et al. (US 20230397340 A1).
Regarding Claim 1, Franson et al. further discloses a method of manufacturing an antenna assembly (Antenna apparatus 100/ 300 is made so its manufacturing method 1100 is inherent; Paragraph 37 as well as figure 1 and 9 of Franson et al.), the method comprising additively manufacturing an element (Method 1100 is a additively manufacturing method since it includes building the antenna structure layer by layer by forming a first part and then a second part and etc.; Paragraph 55-65 and figure 11 of Franson et al.)
(i) a ground plane (Ground plane is formed by a first metallization layer 44/367 which is connected to a second metallization layer 54/369 and can have a conductive filler 365 disposed in between wherein an opening 81/381 is formed between the upper and lower surfaces of said ground plane for a feed input; Paragraph 20-50 as well as figure 1 and 9 of Franson et al.),
(ii) a patch above the ground plane (Antenna element 20 is placed above the dielectric and may be a patch antenna; Paragraph 32 as well as figure 1 and 9 of Franson et al.), and
(iii) a structure having a first end in contact with the ground plane and a second end in contact with the patch( A structure in the form of probe feed 47 may have one end in contact with the patch and a second end in contact with metal pillars 44a and 54a which form the ground layer; Paragraph 20-50 and figure 9 of Franson et al.) and wherein the element is monolithic (Patch 20, Ground plane formed by metallization layers, and structure for feeding the antenna can all be formed from conducive materials using a metal build up process which would result in a monolithic structure; Paragraph 56-58 of Franson et al.); applying a dielectric material between the ground plane and the patch (Dielectric layer 42 is formed and placed above the ground plane and below the patch antenna 20; Paragraph 38-41 and 56 as well as figure 2 and 9 of Franson et al.); and removing at least a section of the ground plane around the first end of the structure, such that the structure extends through the ground plane and is not in contact with the ground plane (Ground plane has an opening 81/381 wherein a portion of it was removes such that the structure can extend through it wherein probe 47 is connected to metal pillars 44a/54a formed as the same times as metallization layers serving as the ground plane in which openings would be formed to disconnect the structure of the probe such that is not in contact with the ground but still connects to the patch ; Paragraph 20-50 as well as figure 1 and 9 of Franson et al.)
wherein the removing forms an annular clearance between the structure and the ground plane that maintains a minimum threshold gap between sidewalls of an opening of the ground plane and the structure sufficient to maintain electrical and physical isolation (The clearance 81a/81b formed in the ground plane that disconnect the metal pillar structures 44a/54a and the probe are such that an isolation area 81 is made to have sufficient gap that would provide both electrical and physical isolation for the structure; Paragraph 30-50 as well as figure 1 and 9 of Franson et al. ).
Franson et al. fails to explicitly disclose an annular clearance between the structure and the ground plane that maintains a minimum threshold gap between sidewalls of an opening of the ground plane and the structure sufficient to maintain electrical and physical isolation to avoid electrical arcing and/or electrical shorting during operation and wherein additively manufacturing the element comprises printing the element using a three-dimensional (3D) printer. Franson et al. does suggest an annular clearance between the structure and the ground plane that maintains a minimum threshold gap between sidewalls of an opening of the ground plane and the structure sufficient to maintain electrical and physical isolation to avoid electrical arcing and/or electrical shorting during operation (The openings 81a/81b forming an isolation gap for the structure would inherently prevent electrical shorting by the probe to the ground during operation since it is sufficiently isolated; Paragraph 30-50 as well as figure 1 and 9 of Franson et al.).
However, Fink et al. does disclose an annular clearance between the structure and the ground plane that maintains a minimum threshold gap between sidewalls of an opening of the ground plane and the structure sufficient to maintain electrical and physical isolation to avoid electrical arcing and/or electrical shorting during operation (A structure in the form of a probe 18 passes through a hole 21 in the ground plane 10 wherein said hole is designed to prevent the probe form electrically shorting to the ground plane 10 during operation wherein the clearance 21 would be made with sufficient gap to accomplish this and similarly done for the embodiment in figure 1 wherein a clearance 7 in the ground plane 3 is made to prevent shorting the inner conductor 4; Paragraphs 2-9 and figure 1-2 of Fink et al.).
Yamada et al. further discloses wherein additively manufacturing the element comprises printing the element using a three-dimensional (3D) printer (EGB structure comprises a patch antenna 110i connected to a ground plane 100 by a coaxial via structure 111j serving as a probe wherein the entire structure is monolithic and formed by a 3D printing process that uses conductive ink to print the structure layer by layer but can also employ other additive process that comprise making the EGB structure with a direct metal laser; Paragraph 23-43 and figure 1-3 of Yamada et al.).
Therefore, it would have been obvious before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art modify the antenna as taught by Franson et al. to have an annular clearance between the structure and the ground plane that maintains a minimum threshold gap between sidewalls of an opening of the ground plane and the structure sufficient to maintain electrical and physical isolation to avoid electrical arcing and/or electrical shorting during operation as taught by Fink et al. to prevent the structure form electrically shorting (Paragraphs 2-9 of Fink et al.).
It would have been further obvious before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art modify the antenna as taught by Franson et al. and Fink et al. to have wherein additively manufacturing the element comprises printing the element using a three-dimensional (3D) printer as taught by Yamada et al. since it has been held that forming in one piece an article which has formerly been formed in two pieces and put together involves only routine skill in the art. Howard v. Detroit Stove Works, 150 U.S. 164 (1893). The motivations stems from wanting to create a smaller antenna structure to save cost (Paragraph 1-7 of Yamada et al.) since 3d printing can be used to make low cost complex structures that are more customizable and it would be obvious to make or form components using different known techniques to meet production requirements.
PNG
media_image1.png
544
759
media_image1.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image2.png
606
880
media_image2.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image3.png
378
686
media_image3.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image4.png
213
453
media_image4.png
Greyscale
Regarding Claim 2, Franson et al. further discloses providing dielectric material between the ground plane and the patch, the additive dielectric material at least in part supporting the patch above the ground plane (Dielectric layer 42 is formed before patch and placed above the ground plane wherein a patch antenna 20 is placed above it later and layer 42 supports the patch above the ground plane; Paragraph 38-41 and 56 as well as figure 9 and 11 of Franson et al.).
Regarding Claim 3, Franson et al. further discloses dielectric material comprises one or more of a dielectric foam, epoxy, and ceramic powder (Dielectric layer 42 is formed from fused silica which is a ceramic powder; Paragraph 22 of Franson et al.).
Regarding Claim 4, Franson et al. and Fink et al. fail to disclose wherein printing the element using the three-dimensional printer comprises direct metal laser melting (DMLM) .
However, Yamada et al. does disclose wherein printing the element using the three-dimensional printer comprises direct metal laser melting (DMLM) (EGB structure comprises a patch antenna 110i connected to a ground plane 100 by a coaxial via structure 111j serving as a probe wherein the entire structure is monolithic and formed by a 3D printing process that uses conductive ink to print the structure layer by layer but can also employ other additive process that comprise making the EGB structure with a direct metal laser; Paragraph 23-43 and figure 1-3 of Yamada et al.).
Therefore, it would have been obvious before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art modify the antenna as taught by Franson et al. and Fink et al. to have printing the element using the three-dimensional printer comprises direct metal laser melting (DMLM) as taught by Yamada et al., since it has been held to be within the general skill of a worker in the art to employ/use a known technique to improve similar devices (methods, products) in the same way is obvious. KSR International Co. v Teleflex Inc., 550 U.S.__, __, 82 USPQ2d 1385, 1395-97 (2007). The motivation stems from the fact that it would be obvious to make or form components using different known techniques to meet production requirements and from wanting to create a smaller antenna structure to save cost (Paragraph 1-7 of Yamada et al.).
Regarding Claim 5, Franson et al. further discloses connecting an inner conductor of a coaxial cable connector to the first end of the structure, and an outer portion of the coaxial cable connector to the ground plane (Coaxial structure may be used in coupling element 85 such that the via may be an inner conductor portion connected to probe 47 with metal pillars 44a/54a and ground vias 72a-b with the circumferential edge 87 to form an outer portion of the coaxial structure connected to the ground plane; Paragraph 20-50 and figures 1-2 and 9 of Franson et al.)
Regarding Claim 10, Franson et al. further discloses wherein at least an exterior of the element comprises conductive material (Patch antenna 20 forms the upper exterior of the structure and would me made from conductive material; Paragraph 32 and figure 9 of Franson et al.).
Claim(s) 6 and 8-9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Franson et al. (US 20250062527 A1) in view of Fink et al. (US 6903687 B1), Yamada et al. (US 20230397340 A1), and Kim et al. (WO 2008032960 A1).
Regarding Claim 6, Franson et al., Fink et al., and Yamada et al. fails to explicitly disclose the structure is a first structure; the element further comprises a second structure having a corresponding first end in contact with the ground plane and a corresponding second end in contact with the patch and the method further comprises removing at least another section of the ground plane around the first end of the second structure, and/or removing at least a part of the second structure
However, Kim et al. does disclose the element further comprises a second structure having a corresponding first end in contact with the ground plane and a corresponding second end in contact with the patch (Patch 20 can have a first structure formed by feed going through hole 70a-90a connecting the patch to the ground and may further include holes 95 in the patch which may be formed to pass through the dielectric layer 130 and come into contact with the ground on the lower surface of the dielectric wherein the holes may be filled with conductive material or a conductive metal pillar thus forming a second structure Paragraph 21 and 95 and Figure 7 of Kim et al.) and the method further comprises removing at least another section of the ground plane around the first end of the second structure, and/or removing at least a part of the second structure (Holes may be formed to not pass through the dielectric layer thus removing that part of the second structure and resulting in one where only holes in patches; Paragraph 86 of Kim et al.)
Therefore, it would have been obvious before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art modify the antenna as taught by Franson et al., Fink et al., and Yamada et al. to have the element further comprises a second structure having a corresponding first end in contact with the ground plane and a corresponding second end in contact with the patch and the method further comprises removing at least another section of the ground plane around the first end of the second structure, and/or removing at least a part of the second structure as taught by Kim et al. to create a patch antenna with a smaller size and desired resonance frequency (Paragraph 39 and 86 of Kim et al.).
PNG
media_image5.png
606
519
media_image5.png
Greyscale
Regarding Claim 8, Franson et al., Fink et al., and Yamada et al. fails to disclose a void within the dielectric material; and applying dielectric material within the void.
Kim et al. does disclose a disclose a void within the dielectric material; and applying dielectric material within the void (Hole 95 may be formed through patch and dielectric creating a void and a method to not create the void/hole in the dielectric layer thus leaving it with dielectric material applied; Paragraph 86 of Kim et al.).
Therefore, it would have been obvious before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art modify the antenna as taught by Franson et al., Fink et al., and Yamada et al. to have a void within the dielectric material; and applying further dielectric material within the void as taught by Kim et al. to create a dielectric with a consistent dielectric constant throughout the layer. Furthermore, It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to remove at least a part of the second structure resulting in a void within the dielectric material and applying further dielectric material, since it has been held to be within the general skill of a worker in the art to employ/use a known technique to improve similar devices (methods, products) in the same way is obvious. KSR International Co. v Teleflex Inc., 550 U.S.__, __, 82 USPQ2d 1385, 1395-97 (2007). The motivation stems from the fact that it would be obvious to make or form components using different known techniques to meet production requirements.
Regarding Claim 9, Franson et al., Fink et al., and Yamada et al. fails to disclose a void within the patch; and the method further comprises one of filling the void with conductive material, or applying further dielectric material within the void.
However, Kim et al. does disclose a void within the patch; and the method further comprises one of filling the void with conductive material, or applying further dielectric material within the void (Hole 95 or 132 may exist in the patch antenna and be filled with a conductive material or conductive metal pillar; Paragraph 21, 78, 103, and 124 as well as figure 7 and 11 of Kim et al.).
Therefore, it would have been obvious before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art modify the antenna as taught by Franson et al., Fink et al., and Yamada et al. to have a void within the patch; and the method further comprises one of filling the void with conductive material, or applying further dielectric material within the void as taught by Kim et al. to have a patch antenna with a smaller size and desired resonance frequency (Paragraph 39 of Kim et al.). Furthermore, It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to remove at least a part of the second structure resulting in a void within the patch, since it has been held to be within the general skill of a worker in the art to employ/use a known technique to improve similar devices (methods, products) in the same way is obvious. KSR International Co. v Teleflex Inc., 550 U.S.__, __, 82 USPQ2d 1385, 1395-97 (2007). The motivation stems from the fact that it would be obvious to make or form components using different known techniques to meet production requirements.
Claim 7 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Franson et al. (US 20250062527 A1) in view of Fink et al. (US 6903687 B1), Yamada et al. (US 20230397340 A1), Kim et al. (WO 2008032960 A1), and Alam et al. (US 11329373 B1).
Regarding Claim 7, Franson et al., Fink et al., Yamada et al., and Kim et al. fail to explicitly disclose a void within the ground plane, and wherein the method further comprises one of :filling the void with conductive material; or applying further dielectric material within the void.
However, Alam et al. discloses a void within the ground plane, and wherein the method further comprises one of :filling the void with conductive material; or applying further dielectric material within the void (Patch antenna structure includes a ground plane 300 with defect areas 360 and 362 which are evacuated portions forming a void which may be filled with a dielectric material in the form of a substrate or insulating filler; Paragraph 21 and 25 as well as figure 3 of Alam et al.).
Therefore, it would have been obvious before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art modify the antenna as taught by Franson et al., Fink et al., Yamada et al., and Kim et al. to have a void within the ground plane, and wherein the method further comprises one of :filling the void with conductive material; or applying further dielectric material within the void as taught by Alam et al. to decrease reflection and expand the bandwidth (Paragraph 24-25 of Alam et al.). Furthermore, It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to remove the at least another section of the ground plane around the first end of the second structure resulting in a void within the ground plane, since it has been held to be within the general skill of a worker in the art to employ/use a known technique to improve similar devices (methods, products) in the same way is obvious. KSR International Co. v Teleflex Inc., 550 U.S.__, __, 82 USPQ2d 1385, 1395-97 (2007). The motivation stems from the fact that it would be obvious to make or form components using different known techniques to meet production requirements.
PNG
media_image6.png
662
442
media_image6.png
Greyscale
Claim(s) 11 and 14-16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Franson et al. (US 20250062527 A1) in view of Fink et al. (US 6903687 B1), Yamada et al. (US 20230397340 A1), and Rokita et al. (GB 2281661 A).
Regarding Claim 11, Franson et al. further discloses a method of manufacturing an antenna assembly (Antenna apparatus 300 is made so its manufacturing method 1100 is inherent; Paragraph 37 as well as figure 1 and 9 of Franson et al. of Franson et al.), the method comprising:
additively manufacturing, a single monolithic and continuous structure comprising conductive material, the monolithic and continuous structure (Method 1100 is a additively manufacturing method since it includes building the antenna structure layer by layer by forming a first part and then a second part and etc. and Patch 20, Ground plane formed by metallization layers, and structure for feeding the antenna can all be formed from conducive materials using a metal build up process which would result in a monolithic structure; Paragraph 55-65 and figure 11 of Franson et al.) including (i) a ground plane (Ground plane is formed by a first metallization layer 44/367 which is connected to a second metallization layer 54/369 and can have a conductive filler 365 disposed in between wherein an opening 81/381 is formed between the upper and lower surfaces of said ground plane for a feed input; Paragraph 20-50 as well as figure 1 and 9 of Franson et al.), (ii) a patch above the ground plane (Antenna element 20 is placed above the dielectric and may be a patch antenna; Paragraph 32 as well as figure 1 and 9 of Franson et al.), and (iii) a structure having a first end in contact with the ground plane and a second end in contact with the patch ( A structure in the form of probe feed 47 may have one end in contact with the patch and a second end in contact with metal pillars 44a and 54a which form the ground layer ; Paragraph 20-50 and figure 9 of Franson et al.);
applying an additive dielectric material between the ground plane, and the patch, the dielectric material at least in part supporting the patch above the ground plane (Dielectric layer 42 is formed and placed above the ground plane and below the patch antenna 20 and supports the patch antenna; Paragraph 38-41 and 56 as well as figure 2 and 9 of Franson et al.); and
removing, after applying the additive dielectric material, at least a section of the ground plane around the first end of the structure, such that the structure extends through the ground plane and is not in contact with the ground plane (Ground plane has an opening 81/381 wherein a portion of it was removes such that the structure can extend through it wherein probe 47 is connected to metal pillars 44a/54a formed as the same times as metallization layers serving as the ground plane in which openings would be formed to disconnect the structure of the probe such that is not in contact with the ground but still connects to the patch wherein the order of making the holes and applying dielectric material can be changes as desired; Paragraph 20-55 as well as figure 1 and 9 of Franson et al.);
wherein the removing forms an annular clearance between the structure and the ground plane that maintains a minimum threshold gap between sidewalls of an opening of the ground plane and the structure sufficient to maintain electrical and physical isolation (The clearance 81a/81b formed in the ground plane that disconnect the metal pillar structures 44a/54a and the probe are such that an isolation area 81 is made to have sufficient gap that would provide both electrical and physical isolation for the structure; Paragraph 30-50 as well as figure 1 and 9 of Franson et al. ).
Franson et al. fails to explicitly disclose an annular clearance is present that maintains a minimum threshold gap between sidewalls of an opening of the ground plane and the structure sufficient to maintain electrical and physical isolation and to avoid electrical arcing and/or electrical shorting during operation, additively manufacturing using a three-dimensional (3D) printer, and dielectric foam material.
Franson et al. does suggest an annular clearance is present that maintains a minimum threshold gap between sidewalls of an opening of the ground plane and the structure sufficient to maintain electrical and physical isolation and to avoid electrical arcing and/or electrical shorting during operation (The openings 81a/81b forming an isolation gap for the structure would inherently prevent electrical shorting by the probe to the ground during operation since it is sufficiently isolated; Paragraph 30-50 as well as figure 1 and 9 of Franson et al.).
However, Fink et al. does disclose an annular clearance is present that maintains a minimum threshold gap between sidewalls of an opening of the ground plane and the structure sufficient to maintain electrical and physical isolation and to avoid electrical arcing and/or electrical shorting during operation (A structure in the form of a probe 18 passes through a hole 21 in the ground plane 10 wherein said hole is designed to prevent the probe form electrically shorting to the ground plane 10 during operation wherein the clearance 21 would be made with sufficient gap to accomplish this and similarly done for the embodiment in figure 1 wherein a clearance 7 in the ground plane 3 is made to prevent shorting the inner conductor 4; Paragraphs 2-9 and figure 1-2 of Fink et al.).
Yamada et al. further discloses additively manufacturing using a three-dimensional (3D) printer (EGB structure comprises a patch antenna 110i connected to a ground plane 100 by a coaxial via structure 111j serving as a probe wherein the entire structure is monolithic and formed by a 3D printing process that uses conductive ink to print the structure layer by layer but can also employ other additive process that comprise making the EGB structure with a direct metal laser; Paragraph 23-43 and figure 1-3 of Yamada et al.).
Rokita et al. further discloses a dielectric foam material (Patch antenna 102 is formed with probes 106 that pass through holes 114/116 to connect to a ground plane wherein they also pass through a dielectric material 108 that may be a dielectric foam wherein said foam is applied between the ground and patch and is designed to support the patch structure; Pg. 5-8 and figure 1-2 of Rokita et al.).
Therefore, it would have been obvious before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art modify the antenna as taught by Franson et al. to have an annular clearance is present that maintains a minimum threshold gap between sidewalls of an opening of the ground plane and the structure sufficient to maintain electrical and physical isolation and to avoid electrical arcing and/or electrical shorting during operation as taught by Fink et al. to prevent the structure form electrically shorting (Paragraphs 2-9 of Fink et al.).
It would have been further obvious before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art modify the antenna as taught by Franson et al. and Fink et al. to have wherein additively manufacturing the element comprises printing the element using a three-dimensional (3D) printer as taught by Yamada et al. since it has been held that forming in one piece an article which has formerly been formed in two pieces and put together involves only routine skill in the art. Howard v. Detroit Stove Works, 150 U.S. 164 (1893). The motivations stems from wanting to create a smaller antenna structure to save cost (Paragraph 1-7 of Yamada et al.) since 3d printing can be used to make low cost complex structures that are more customizable and it would be obvious to make or form components using different known techniques to meet production requirements. It would have also been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art modify the antenna as taught by Franson et al., Fink et al., and Yamada et al., to have dielectric foam material as taught by Rokita et al. since it has been held that the simple substitution of one known element for another to obtain predictable results is obvious. The motivation stems from the fact that he material affects the dielectric properties of the substrate which controls antenna performance.
PNG
media_image7.png
222
422
media_image7.png
Greyscale
Regarding Claim 14, Franson et al. and Fink et al. fail to disclose , wherein additively manufacturing the single monolithic and continuous structure comprises printing the single monolithic and continuous structure using direct metal laser melting (DMLM).
However, Yamada et al. does disclose , wherein additively manufacturing the single monolithic and continuous structure comprises printing the single monolithic and continuous structure using direct metal laser melting (DMLM) (EGB structure comprises a patch antenna 110i connected to a ground plane 100 by a coaxial via structure 111j serving as a probe wherein the entire structure is monolithic and formed by a 3D printing process that uses conductive ink to print the structure layer by layer but can also employ other additive process that comprise making the EGB structure with a direct metal laser; Paragraph 23-43 and figure 1-3 of Yamada et al.).
Therefore, it would have been obvious before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art modify the antenna as taught by Franson et al. and Fink et al. to have , wherein additively manufacturing the single monolithic and continuous structure comprises printing the single monolithic and continuous structure using direct metal laser melting (DMLM) as taught by Yamada et al., since it has been held to be within the general skill of a worker in the art to employ/use a known technique to improve similar devices (methods, products) in the same way is obvious. KSR International Co. v Teleflex Inc., 550 U.S.__, __, 82 USPQ2d 1385, 1395-97 (2007). The motivation stems from the fact that it would be obvious to make or form components using different known techniques to meet production requirements and from wanting to create a smaller antenna structure to save cost (Paragraph 1-7 of Yamada et al.).
Regarding Claim 15, Franson et al. further discloses connecting an inner conductor of a coaxial cable connector to a probe, and an outer portion of the coaxial cable connector to the ground plane (Coaxial structure may be used in coupling element 85 such that the via may be an inner conductor portion connected to probe 47 and ground vias 72a-b with the circumferential edge 87 to form an outer portion connected to the ground plane; Paragraph 27-31 and figures 2 and 9 of Franson et al.).
Regarding Claim 16, Franson et al. discloses an antenna structure (Antenna apparatus 300; Paragraph 37 and figure 9 of Franson et al.) comprising
a ground plane having a first opening extending from an upper surface of the ground plane to a lower surface of the ground plane (Ground plane is formed by a first metallization layer 367 which is connected to a second metallization layer 369 and has a conductive filler 365 disposed in between wherein an opening 381 is formed between the upper and lower surfaces of said ground plane for a feed input; Paragraph 20-49 and figure 9 of Franson et al.);
a dielectric material above the ground plane, the dielectric material having a second opening extending from an upper surface of the dielectric material to a lower surface of the dielectric material; wherein the dielectric material at least in part structurally supports the patch above the ground plane (Dielectric layer 42 is placed above the ground plane and the substrate may include a feed probe 47 between the upper surface of the dielectric and lower surface wherein an opening would be inherent to placing the probe wherein the dielectric supports the patch antenna; Paragraph 38-41 and 56 as well as figure 2 and 9 of Franson et al.);
a patch above the dielectric material (Antenna element 20 is placed above the dielectric and may be a patch antenna; Paragraph 32 and figure 9 of Franson et al.); and
a probe comprising conductive material extending from the patch and through the second opening wherein the ground plane, the patch, and the probe are portions of a monolithic and continuous structure comprising conductive material(Probe 47 and patch 20 are made from the same conductive metal forming a monolithic structure wherein the probe extends through the second opening in the dielectric and the process of making builds up from the ground which would also be a monolithic structure; Paragraph 20-49 and 55-60 and figure 9 of Franson et al.) ; and
wherein an annular clearance between the probe and sidewalls of the first opening maintains a minimum threshold gap sufficient to maintain electrical and physical isolation (The clearance 81a/81b formed in the ground plane that disconnect the metal pillar structures 44a/54a and the probe are such that an isolation area 81 is made to have sufficient gap that would provide both electrical and physical isolation for the structure; Paragraph 30-50 as well as figure 1 and 9 of Franson et al. ).
Franson et al. fails to explicitly disclose a probe extending from the patch and through the first and second openings such that the probe extends through the first opening of the ground plane without making a physical contact with the ground plane and an annular clearance between the probe and sidewalls of the first opening maintains a minimum threshold gap sufficient to maintain electrical and physical isolation and to avoid electrical arcing and/or electrical shorting during operation, the ground plane, the patch, and the probe are portions of a monolithic and continuous structure comprising conductive material that is additively manufactured using a three-dimensional (3D) printer, such that the ground plane, the patch, and the probe are continuous with one another without an interface (such as a seam) therebetween, and dielectric foam material. Franson et al. does an annular clearance between the probe and sidewalls of the first opening maintains a minimum threshold gap sufficient to maintain electrical and physical isolation and to avoid electrical arcing and/or electrical shorting during operation (The openings 81a/81b forming an isolation gap for the structure would inherently prevent electrical shorting by the probe to the ground during operation since it is sufficiently isolated; Paragraph 30-50 as well as figure 1 and 9 of Franson et al.).
However, Rokita et al. discloses a probe extending from the patch and through the first and second openings such that the probe extends through the first opening of the ground plane without making a physical contact with the ground plane (Patch Antenna 102 has a monolithic probe 104 that extends through a second opening in the dielectric layer and through the first opening in the ground layer such that it does not make physical contact with the ground as seen in figure 2 of Rokita et al.) and dielectric foam material (Patch antenna 102 is formed with probes 106 that pass through holes 114/116 to connect to a ground plane wherein they also pass through a dielectric material 108 that may be a dielectric foam wherein said foam is applied between the ground and patch and is designed to support the patch structure; Pg. 5-8 and figure 1-2 of Rokita et al.).
Fink et al. also discloses an annular clearance between the probe and sidewalls of the first opening maintains a minimum threshold gap sufficient to maintain electrical and physical isolation and to avoid electrical arcing and/or electrical shorting during operation (A structure in the form of a probe 18 passes through a hole 21 in the ground plane 10 wherein said hole is designed to prevent the probe form electrically shorting to the ground plane 10 during operation wherein the clearance 21 would be made with sufficient gap to accomplish this and similarly done for the embodiment in figure 1 wherein a clearance 7 in the ground plane 3 is made to prevent shorting the inner conductor 4; Paragraphs 2-9 and figure 1-2 of Fink et al.).
Yamada et al. also discloses the ground plane, the patch, and the probe are portions of a monolithic and continuous structure comprising conductive material that is additively manufactured using a three-dimensional (3D) printer, such that the ground plane, the patch, and the probe are continuous with one another without an interface (such as a seam) therebetween, and a dielectric foam (EGB structure comprises a patch antenna 110i connected to a ground plane 100 by a coaxial via structure 111j serving as a probe wherein the entire structure is monolithic and formed by a 3D printing process that uses conductive ink to print the structure layer by layer but can also employ other additive process that comprise making the EGB structure with a direct metal laser and the probe, patch, and ground are continuous with each other without a seam therebetween; Paragraph 23-43 and figure 1-3 of Yamada et al.)
Therefore, it would have been obvious before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art modify the antenna as taught by Franson et al. to have a probe extending from the patch and through the first and second openings such that the probe extends through the first opening of the ground plane without making a physical contact with the ground plane as taught by Rokita et al. to allow the probe to connect to the feed while being isolated from the ground plane (Pg. 4-9 of Rokita et al.) and to have dielectric foam material as taught by Rokita et al. since it has been held that the simple substitution of one known element for another to obtain predictable results is obvious. The motivation stems from the fact that he material affects the dielectric properties of the substrate which controls antenna performance.
It would have been further obvious before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art modify the antenna as taught by Franson et al. and Rokita et al. to have an annular clearance between the probe and sidewalls of the first opening maintains a minimum threshold gap sufficient to maintain electrical and physical isolation and to avoid electrical arcing and/or electrical shorting during operation as taught by Fink et al. to prevent the structure form electrically shorting (Paragraphs 2-9 of Fink et al.).
It would have been further obvious before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art modify the antenna as taught by Franson et al., Fink et al., and Rokita et al. to have the ground plane, the patch, and the probe are portions of a monolithic and continuous structure comprising conductive material that is additively manufactured using a three-dimensional (3D) printer, such that the ground plane, the patch, and the probe are continuous with one another without an interface (such as a seam) therebetween, as taught by Yamada et al. since it has been held that forming in one piece an article which has formerly been formed in two pieces and put together involves only routine skill in the art. Howard v. Detroit Stove Works, 150 U.S. 164 (1893). The motivations stems from wanting to create a smaller antenna structure to save cost (Paragraph 1-7 of Yamada et al.) since 3d printing can be used to make low cost complex structures that are more customizable and it would be obvious to make or form components using different known techniques to meet production requirements.
Claim 12 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Franson et al. (US 20250062527 A1) in view of Fink et al. (US 6903687 B1), Yamada et al. (US 20230397340 A1), Rokita et al. (GB 2281661 A), and Heino et al. (US 20160141085 A1).
Regarding Claim 12, Franson et al., Fink et al., Yamada et al., and Rokita et al., fail to explicitly disclose wherein applying the additive dielectric foam material comprises depositing a mixture of an activator and a foaming portion in the space between the ground plane and the patch, and curing the mixture such that rigid foam forms from the activator and the foaming portion.
However, Heino et al. does disclose wherein applying the additive dielectric foam material comprises depositing a mixture of an activator and a foaming portion in the space between the ground plane and the patch, and curing the mixture such that rigid foam forms from the activator and the foaming portion (Antenna assembly 40 comprises a patch antenna 42 connected to a ground 46 with a probe 48 and a substrate 44 between the patch/ground wherein the substrate is made from a polymer nanocomposite material 1 that can be an additive dielectric foam made from a cure/catalyst agent serving as a activator and a foaming agent wherein the solution can be poured between a patch/ground and cured; Paragraph 51-95 and figure 1-6 of Heino et al.).
Therefore, it would have been obvious before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art modify the antenna as taught by Franson et al., Fink et al., Yamada et al., and Rokita et al., to have wherein applying the additive dielectric foam material comprises depositing a mixture of an activator and a foaming portion in the space between the ground plane and the patch, and curing the mixture such that rigid foam forms from the activator and the foaming portion as taught by Heino et al. since it has been held that forming in one piece an article which has formerly been formed in two pieces and put together involves only routine skill in the art. Howard v. Detroit Stove Works, 150 U.S. 164 (1893). The motivation stems from wanting a substrate with a designed permittivity and fabricate flexible substrates for thin microstrip or printed antenna structures, resulting in a flexible high performance antenna structure (Paragraph 87 and 95 of Heino et al.).
PNG
media_image8.png
257
426
media_image8.png
Greyscale
Claim 17 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Franson et al. (US 20250062527 A1) in view of Fink et al. (US 6903687 B1), Yamada et al. (US 20230397340 A1), Rokita et al. (GB 2281661 A), and Woo et al. (KR 20050043520 A).
Regarding Claim 17, Franson et al., Rokita et al., Fink et al., and Yamada et al. fails to disclose the patch has a third opening therewithin, the third opening comprises dielectric material.
However, Woo et al. does disclose a patch has a third opening therewithin, the third opening comprising dielectric material (Patch 20 is separated from the ground 10 by a dielectric layer in the form of air layer and patch 20 further comprises openings formed between the protrusion members 24 wherein a new dielectric material 42 may be inserted in 3 locations of the patch openings along the corners and center thereby creating an opening filled with dielectric material; Pg. 4-5 and Figure 1 and 2 of Woo et al.).
Therefore, it would have been obvious before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art modify the antenna as taught by Franson et al., Rokita et al., Fink et al., and Yamada et al. to the patch have a third opening therewithin, the third opening comprising dielectric material as taught by Woo et al. to eliminate the need for using dielectric with a high dielectric constant and reduce manufacturing cost (Pg. 11, Paragraph 1 of Woo et al.).
PNG
media_image9.png
643
463
media_image9.png
Greyscale
Claim 18 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Franson et al. (US 20250062527 A1) in view of Fink et al. (US 6903687 B1), Yamada et al. (US 20230397340 A1), Rokita et al. (GB 2281661 A), and Alam et al. (US 11329373 B1).
Regarding Claim 18, Franson et al., Rokita et al., Fink et al., and Yamada et al. fails to disclose the ground plane has a third opening different from the first opening, and wherein the third opening is filled with the dielectric material, without any probe extending through the third opening.
However, Alam et al. discloses a ground plane has a third opening different from the first opening, and wherein the third opening is filled with the dielectric material, without any probe extending through the third opening (Patch antenna structure includes a ground plane 300 with a third defect area 364 serving as a first opening with a feedline and 2 other defect areas 360 and 362 which may serve as a third opening which may be filled with a dielectric material in the form of a substrate or insulating filler; Paragraph 21 and 25 as well as figure 3 of Alam et al.).
Therefore, it would have been obvious before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art modify the antenna as taught by Franson et al., Rokita et al., Fink et al., and Yamada et al. to have the ground plane have a third opening different from the first opening, and wherein the third opening is filled with the dielectric material, without any probe extending through the third opening as taught by Alam et al. to decrease reflection and expand the bandwidth (Paragraph 24-25 of Alam et al.).
Claim 19 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Franson et al. (US 20250062527 A1) in view of Fink et al. (US 6903687 B1), Yamada et al. (US 20230397340 A1), Rokita et al. (GB 2281661 A), and Kim et al. (WO 2008032960 A1).
Regarding Claim 19, Franson et al., Rokita et al., and Fink et al. fails to disclose the patch comprises (i) a first section, and (ii) a second section around the first section, wherein the first and second sections comprise conductive material, such that the first and second sections are continuous with one another without an interface therebetween.
However, Kim et al. does disclose a the patch comprises (i) a first section (Patch antenna 110 may comprise openings 134 which define a first section in figure 11 and 12 of Kim et al.), and (ii) a second section around the first section (The Rest of the patch antenna 110 forms a second section that surrounds the first section as seen in figure 11 and 12 of Kim et al.), wherein the first and second sections comprise conductive material, such that the first and second sections are continuous with one another without an interface therebetween. (Conductive material like gold may be applied into the holes wherein the rest of the patch may also be made from gold thus allowing them to be a continuous structure with no interface between them Paragraph 78, 103, and 124 of Kim et al.).
Therefore, it would have been obvious before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art modify the antenna as taught by Franson et al., Rokita et al., and Fink et al. to have the patch comprise (i) a first section, and (ii) a second section around the first section, wherein the first and second sections comprise conductive material, such that the first and second sections are continuous with one another without an interface therebetween as taught by Kim et al. to have a patch antenna with a smaller size and desired resonance frequency (Paragraph 39 of Kim et al.).
Claim 20 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Franson et al. (US 20250062527 A1) in view of Fink et al. (US 6903687 B1), Yamada et al. (US 20230397340 A1), Rokita et al. (GB 2281661 A), and Celik et al. (EP 3571743 B1).
Regarding Claim 20, Franson et al. further discloses the ground plane comprises (i) a first section (The ground plane includes metallization layers 44/367 and 54/369 which may have metal pillars forming a first section; Paragraph 50 as well as figure 1 and 9 of Franson et al.), and (ii) a second section around the first section (The ground plane also includes a conductive filler material layer which forms a second section that surrounds the first section; Paragraph 37 as well as figure 1 and 9 of Franson et al.), wherein the first and second sections comprise conductive material (Metallization layers and there pillars may be formed from conductive material of copper and nickel while the filler material may be a conductive epoxy which would cause an interface between the first section and the second section due to different conductive materials; Paragraph 39 and 58 of Franson et al.).
Franson et al., Fink et al., Yamada et al., and Rokita et al. fail to explicitly disclose wherein the first and second sections comprise conductive material, such that the first and second sections are continuous with one another without an interface therebetween. Franson et al. does suggest the first and second sections comprise conductive material, such that the first and second sections are continuous with one another without an interface therebetween (Metallization layers 44 and 55 may be a first and second section that are continuous with each other wherein no filler material may be between them leading to no seam; Paragraph 20-50 and figure 9 of Franson et al. ).
However, Celik et al. does disclose wherein the first and second sections comprise conductive material, such that the first and second sections are continuous with one another without an interface therebetween (Patch antenna 106 is connected to a ground 116 by a probe 112 wherein the ground comprises first bottom portions 116 and second side portions 148 wherein they may both be made from conductive material and can be made as a continuous structure; Paragraph 71-75 and figure 33 of Celik et al. ).
Therefore, it would have been obvious before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art modify the antenna as taught by Franson et al., Rokita et al., Fink et al., and Yamada et al. to have wherein the first and second sections comprise conductive material, such that the first and second sections are continuous with one another without an interface therebetween as taught by Celik et al. to form a shield structure for the antenna (Paragraph 71-75 of Celik et al.).
PNG
media_image10.png
223
414
media_image10.png
Greyscale
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1, 4, 11-12, and 16 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any combination of references applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
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.
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure
US 20220368028 A1 (Govoni; Mark A. et al.) relates to a configuration of a patch antenna array that comprises a patch antenna on a dielectric and ground plane fed by a coaxial cable.
US 9196951 B2 (Baks; Christian W. et al.) relates to a configuration of a patch antenna structure with a ground layer and dielectric layer
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to GURBIR SINGH whose telephone number is (703)756-4637. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Thursday 8 a.m. - 5 p.m. 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 http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Dameon E Levi can be reached at (571)272-2105. 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.
/DAMEON E LEVI/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2845
/GURBIR SINGH/Examiner, Art Unit 2845
Prosecution Insights