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 .
Status of Claims
Claims 1-20 pending.
Response to Remarks
Amendments and remarks filed January 5, 2026 have been fully considered.
Rejections under 35 U.S.C. § 112 have been overcome by amendments and remarks filed January 5, 2026.
Applicant’s remarks regarding rejections under 35 U.S.C. § 102 and 103 have been fully considered but are not persuasive for the following reasons:
Argument 1 (Remarks pg. 8-9): Applicant appears to argue that Aoki does not teach “a first antenna element disposed on a second surface of the di- electric substrate and configured to receive the signal supplied from the waveguide by a first proximity coupling” as recited by claim 1 because antenna elements 11 are wired to receive power via the microstrip line SL included in the converter section 5 and because L8 has a circuit element 12 composing a transmission/reception circuit, being wired to transmit and receive a signal via the microstrip line SL composing the converter section 5.
Response 1: Examiner respectfully disagrees. The broadest reasonable interpretation of the claim limitation in light of the specification includes the interpretation that “by a first proximity coupling” merely describes how the waveguide supplies the signal, but does not place a limitation on how the signal is received by the antenna element. Therefore, the reception, by a first antenna element, of any signal that was at some point supplied from the waveguide by a first proximity coupling reads on this limitation. In this case, Aoki teaches at [0031] – “a high frequency signal outputted from the transmission/reception circuit is supplied to the antenna element 11 via the converter section 5 in the outer layer L8, the pseudo waveguide 4 and the converter section 5 in the outer layer L1” (underlining is Examiner’s). Aoki further teaches Figs. 1-3 and [0033] – “resonant patches PT are formed in the inner layers L2 and L7… waveguide formation section NP which is an electrical opening having a rectangular shape to form the pseudo waveguide 4… in the waveguide formation section NP, each of the resonant patches PT forms a pattern similar to the shape of the waveguide formation section NP.” Therefore, Aoki’s signal is supplied from the waveguide 4 by first proximity coupling at a first resonant patch PT. That signal is later received by a first antenna element 11.
Argument 2 (Remarks pg. 9): Applicant appears to argue that Aoki does not teach “a second antenna element disposed on the second surface of the di- electric substrate and configured to receive the signal supplied from the waveguide by a second proximity coupling” as recited by claim 1 for reasons similar to those of Argument 1, (i.e., because there is a wired connection between the microstrip line SL and the antenna elements 11).
Response 2: Examiner respectfully disagrees for reasons similar to those discussed above in Response 1. The broadest reasonable interpretation of the claim limitation in light of the specification includes the interpretation that “by a second proximity coupling” merely describes how the waveguide supplies the signal, but does not place a limitation on how the signal is received by the antenna element. Therefore, the reception, by a second antenna element, of any signal that was at some point supplied from the waveguide by a second proximity coupling reads on this limitation. In this case, Aoki teaches at [0031] – “a high frequency signal outputted from the transmission/reception circuit is supplied to the antenna element 11 via the converter section 5 in the outer layer L8, the pseudo waveguide 4 and the converter section 5 in the outer layer L1” (underlining is Examiner’s). Aoki further teaches Figs. 1-3 and [0033] – “resonant patches PT are formed in the inner layers L2 and L7… waveguide formation section NP which is an electrical opening having a rectangular shape to form the pseudo waveguide 4… in the waveguide formation section NP, each of the resonant patches PT forms a pattern similar to the shape of the waveguide formation section NP.” Therefore, Aoki’s signal is supplied from the waveguide 4 by second proximity coupling at a second resonant patch PT. That signal is later received by a second antenna element 11.
Argument 3 (Remarks pg. 10): Applicant appears to argue that claim 19 recites similar limitations to claim 1 and is therefore allowable for similar reasons as those discussed above in Arguments 1 and 2.
Response 3: Examiner respectfully disagrees for reasons similar to those discussed above in Responses 1 and 2.
Argument 4 (Remarks pg. 10): Applicant appears to argue that dependent claims are allowable because of the allowable nature of the parent claims and because none of the other cited references teach the limitation argued above in Arguments 1-3.
Response 4: Examiner respectfully disagrees for reasons similar to those discussed above in Responses 1-3.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 1-3, 8, 10, 14, 17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by US 20160336654 A1 to Aoki.
Regarding claim 1,
Aoki teaches:
An antenna device ([0027] – “antenna apparatus 1”) comprising:
a dielectric substrate; ([0027] – “collective lamination substrate 3 having 8 pattern layers L1 to L8 formed to sandwich 7 dielectric layers.”)
a power supply line disposed on a first surface of the dielectric substrate; ([0030-31] – “The outer layers L1 and L8 have converter sections 5, 5… converter section 5 is provided with a microstrip line SL… antenna elements 11 are wired to receive power via the microstrip line SL included in the converter section 5”)
a waveguide configured to transmit a signal fed from the power supply line in the dielectric substrate; ([0030] – “the microstrip line SL is wired such that one end thereof is positioned around the center of a portion (hereinafter is referred to as pseudo waveguide opening) corresponding to an opening end of the pseudo waveguide 4.”)
a first antenna element disposed on a second surface of the di- electric substrate and configured to receive the signal supplied from the waveguide by a first proximity coupling; (Fig. 1; [0031] – “a high frequency signal outputted from the transmission/reception circuit is supplied to the antenna element 11 via the converter section 5 in the outer layer L8, the pseudo waveguide 4 and the converter section 5 in the outer layer L1. Then, the signal received by the antenna element 11 is supplied to the transmission/reception circuit via the converter section 5 in the outer layer L1, the pseudo waveguide 4 and the converter section 5 in the outer layer L8.” The broadest reasonable interpretation of the claim limitation in light of the specification includes the interpretation that “by a first proximity coupling” merely describes how the waveguide supplies the signal, but does not place a limitation on how the signal is received by the antenna element. Signal is supplied from the waveguide 4 by first proximity coupling at a first resonant patch PT. That signal is later received by a first antenna element 11. See Response to Remarks section above.) and
a second antenna element disposed on the second surface of the di- electric substrate and configured to receive the signal supplied from the waveguide by a second proximity coupling. (Fig. 7; [0043] – “as shown in FIG. 7, two microstrip lines SL can be used to receive and output the signal. In this case, the microstrip line SL including the antenna element 11 may preferably be arranged to be symmetric with respect to the center of the opening of the pseudo waveguide 4.” The broadest reasonable interpretation of the claim limitation in light of the specification includes the interpretation that “by a second proximity coupling” merely describes how the waveguide supplies the signal, but does not place a limitation on how the signal is received by the antenna element. Signal is supplied from the waveguide 4 by second proximity coupling at a second resonant patch PT. That signal is later received by a second antenna element 11. See Response to Remarks section above.)
Regarding claim 2,
Aoki teaches the invention as claimed and discussed above.
Aoki further teaches:
The antenna device according to claim 1, wherein the first antenna element includes a first end, the second antenna element includes a second end, and the first end faces the second end with a space between the first end and the second end. (Fig. 7)
Regarding claim 3,
Aoki teaches the invention as claimed and discussed above.
Aoki further teaches:
The antenna device according to claim 2, wherein the waveguide is provided between an end of the power supply line and a portion between the first end of the first antenna element and the second end of the second antenna element in a thickness direction of the dielectric substrate. (Figs. 1, 7)
Regarding claim 8,
Aoki teaches the invention as claimed and discussed above.
Aoki further teaches:
The antenna device according to claim 2, wherein an end of the waveguide on an antenna side has a first aperture and a second aperture, the signal transmitted through the waveguide is supplied to the first end of the first antenna element through the first aperture, and the signal transmitted through the waveguide is supplied to the second end of the second antenna element through the second aperture. (Figs. 3, 7)
Regarding claim 10,
Aoki teaches the invention as claimed and discussed above.
Aoki further teaches:
The antenna device according to claim 1, wherein the first antenna element and the second antenna element are connected together forming an integral antenna structure. (Figs. 1, 7)
Regarding claim 12,
Aoki teaches the invention as claimed and discussed above.
Aoki further teaches:
The antenna device according to claim 1, further comprising: a plurality of antenna elements including the first antenna element and the second antenna element. (Figs. 1, 7; [0043] – “as shown in FIG. 7, two microstrip lines SL can be used to receive and output the signal. In this case, the microstrip line SL including the antenna element 11 may preferably be arranged to be symmetric with respect to the center of the opening of the pseudo waveguide 4.”)
Regarding claim 14,
Aoki teaches the invention as claimed and discussed above.
Aoki further teaches:
The antenna device according to claim 1, wherein the first antenna element and the second antenna element each comprises a plurality of patch elements. (Figs. 1, 7)
Regarding claim 17,
Aoki teaches the invention as claimed and discussed above.
Aoki further teaches:
The antenna device according to claim 1, wherein the waveguide is formed by a plurality of vias and a plurality of ground plates. (Figs. 1, 3; [0034-36] – “All of the ground patterns GP have holes forming vias included in the second via group 8 (portions where no patterns are formed). Further, the ground pattern GP in the inner layers L2 and L7 have holes forming vias included in the first via group 7 (portions where no patterns are formed).”)
Regarding claim 19,
Aoki teaches:
A radar device comprising:
an antenna device ([0027] – “antenna apparatus 1”) including
a dielectric substrate, ([0027] – “collective lamination substrate 3 having 8 pattern layers L1 to L8 formed to sandwich 7 dielectric layers.”)
a power supply line disposed on a first surface of the di- electric substrate, ([0030-31] – “The outer layers L1 and L8 have converter sections 5, 5… converter section 5 is provided with a microstrip line SL… antenna elements 11 are wired to receive power via the microstrip line SL included in the converter section 5”)
a waveguide which transmits a signal fed from the power supply line in the dielectric substrate, ([0030] – “the microstrip line SL is wired such that one end thereof is positioned around the center of a portion (hereinafter is referred to as pseudo waveguide opening) corresponding to an opening end of the pseudo waveguide 4.”)
a first antenna disposed on a second surface of the di- electric substrate and configured to receive the signal supplied from the waveguide by a first proximity coupling, (Fig. 1; [0031] – “a high frequency signal outputted from the transmission/reception circuit is supplied to the antenna element 11 via the converter section 5 in the outer layer L8, the pseudo waveguide 4 and the converter section 5 in the outer layer L1. Then, the signal received by the antenna element 11 is supplied to the transmission/reception circuit via the converter section 5 in the outer layer L1, the pseudo waveguide 4 and the converter section 5 in the outer layer L8.”) and
a second antenna element disposed on the second surface of the dielectric substrate and configured to receive the signal supplied from the waveguide by a second proximity coupling; (Fig. 7; [0043] – “as shown in FIG. 7, two microstrip lines SL can be used to receive and output the signal. In this case, the microstrip line SL including the antenna element 11 may preferably be arranged to be symmetric with respect to the center of the opening of the pseudo waveguide 4.”) and
a transmission/reception unit configured to:
transmit a transmission signal with the antenna device, (Fig. 1; [0031] – “a high frequency signal outputted from the transmission/reception circuit is supplied to the antenna element 11 via the converter section 5 in the outer layer L8, the pseudo waveguide 4 and the converter section 5 in the outer layer L1.) and
receive a reception signal with the antenna device. (Fig. 1; [0031] – “then, the signal received by the antenna element 11 is supplied to the transmission/reception circuit via the converter section 5 in the outer layer L1, the pseudo waveguide 4 and the converter section 5 in the outer layer L8.”)
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claim(s) 7 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 20160336654 A1 to Aoki.
Regarding claim 7,
Aoki teaches the invention as claimed and discussed above.
Aoki further teaches:
The antenna device according to claim 2, wherein
the first antenna element has a first length, (Figs. 1, 7 – antenna element 11) and
the second antenna element has a second length ([0043] – “as shown in FIG. 7, two microstrip lines SL can be used to receive and output the signal. In this case, the microstrip line SL including the antenna element 11 may preferably be arranged to be symmetric with respect to the center of the opening of the pseudo waveguide 4”) (lined through limitations correspond to limitations not taught by reference)
A modification of Aoki to use equal length antennas would have been obvious to try as one of a finite number of identified, predictable solutions with a reasonable expectation of success. Such a finding is proper because (1) at the time of the invention, there had been a recognized problem or need in the art, in this case a need to choose antenna length of each antenna element; (2) there are a finite number of identified, predictable potential solutions to the recognized need or problem, antenna element lengths can either be equal to or unequal to one another; (3) One of ordinary skill in the art could have pursued the known potential solutions with a reasonable expectation of success; and (4) no additional findings based on the Graham factual inquiries are necessary, in view of the facts of the case under consideration, to explain a conclusion of obviousness (See MPEP 2143).
Claim(s) 11 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 20160336654 A1 to Aoki in view of US 5724042 A to Komatsu.
Regarding claim 11,
Aoki teaches the invention as claimed and discussed above.
Aoki does not teach the additional elements of the claim.
Komatsu teaches:
The antenna device according to claim 10, wherein
the first antenna element has a first length,
the second antenna element has a second length,
the first length is longer than the second length by a half of a wavelength, the wavelength is defined by a frequency of the signal. (Fig. 6; [col. 6, para. 1] – “The length of the feeder line portion that interconnects the two patches of each of the eight planar array antenna elements of one group is substantially a half wavelength different from the length of the feeder line portion that interconnects the two patches of each of the eight planar array antenna elements of the other group so that the electromagnetic waves will be radiated from the planar array antenna elements of the two groups at the same angle toward the secondary radiator.” See instant application [0040] and Fig. 11)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have applied Komatsu’s known technique to Aoki’s known method ready for improvement to yield predictable results. Such a finding is proper because (1) Aoki teaches a base antenna array; (2) Komatsu teaches spacing of adjacent antennas in an antenna array; (3) one of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that applying the known technique would have yielded predictable results and resulted in a system with decreased interference; and (4) no additional findings based on the Graham factual inquiries are necessary, in view of the facts of the case under consideration, to explain a conclusion of obviousness (See MPEP 2143).
Claim(s) 13 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 20160336654 A1 to Aoki in view of US 11777230 B2 to Zhu.
Regarding claim 13,
Aoki teaches the invention as claimed and discussed above.
Aoki does not teach the additional elements of the claim.
Zhu teaches:
The antenna device according to claim 2, wherein a length of the space is one wavelength defined by a frequency of the signal. ([claim 3] – “a distance between adjacent antennas on the antenna panel is equal to a length of a wavelength of the first radio wave or the second radio wave”)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have applied Zhu’s known technique to Aoki’s known method ready for improvement to yield predictable results. Such a finding is proper because (1) Aoki teaches a base antenna array; (2) Zhu teaches spacing of adjacent antennas in an antenna array; (3) one of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that applying the known technique would have yielded predictable results and resulted in a system with decreased interference; and (4) no additional findings based on the Graham factual inquiries are necessary, in view of the facts of the case under consideration, to explain a conclusion of obviousness (See MPEP 2143).
Claim(s) 18 and 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 20160336654 A1 to Aoki in view of US 6424298 B1 to Nishikawa.
Regarding claim 18,
Aoki teaches the invention as claimed and discussed above.
Aoki does not teach the additional elements of the claim.
Nishikawa teaches:
The antenna device according to claim 1, wherein the antenna device is mounted on a vehicle. ([col. 1, para. 1] – “planar array antenna formed of a microstrip conductor and capable of being used as a transmission/reception antenna of a radar mounted on a vehicle.”)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have applied Nishikawa’s known technique to Aoki’s known method ready for improvement to yield predictable results. Such a finding is proper because (1) Aoki teaches a base microstrip antenna array; (2) Nishikawa teaches use of microstrip antenna array for vehicle radar and vehicle control; (3) one of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that applying the known technique would have yielded predictable results and resulted in a system with decreased interference; and (4) no additional findings based on the Graham factual inquiries are necessary, in view of the facts of the case under consideration, to explain a conclusion of obviousness (See MPEP 2143).
Regarding claim 20,
Aoki teaches:
A vehicle control system comprising:
(lined through limitations correspond to limitations not taught by reference)
([0027] – “antenna apparatus 1”) including
a dielectric substrate, ([0027] – “collective lamination substrate 3 having 8 pattern layers L1 to L8 formed to sandwich 7 dielectric layers.”)
a power supply line disposed on a first surface of the di- electric substrate, ([0030-31] – “The outer layers L1 and L8 have converter sections 5, 5… converter section 5 is provided with a microstrip line SL… antenna elements 11 are wired to receive power via the microstrip line SL included in the converter section 5”)
a waveguide which transmits a signal fed from the power supply line in the dielectric substrate, ([0030] – “the microstrip line SL is wired such that one end thereof is positioned around the center of a portion (hereinafter is referred to as pseudo waveguide opening) corresponding to an opening end of the pseudo waveguide 4.”)
a first antenna disposed on a second surface of the dielectric substrate and configured to receive the signal supplied from the waveguide by a first proximity coupling, (Fig. 1; [0031] – “a high frequency signal outputted from the transmission/reception circuit is supplied to the antenna element 11 via the converter section 5 in the outer layer L8, the pseudo waveguide 4 and the converter section 5 in the outer layer L1. Then, the signal received by the antenna element 11 is supplied to the transmission/reception circuit via the converter section 5 in the outer layer L1, the pseudo waveguide 4 and the converter section 5 in the outer layer L8.” The broadest reasonable interpretation of the claim limitation in light of the specification includes the interpretation that “by a first proximity coupling” merely describes how the waveguide supplies the signal, but does not place a limitation on how the signal is received by the antenna element. Signal is supplied from the waveguide 4 by first proximity coupling at a first resonant patch PT. That signal is later received by a first antenna element 11. See Response to Remarks section above.) and
a second antenna element disposed on the second surface of the dielectric substrate and configured to receive the signal supplied from the waveguide by a second proximity coupling; (Fig. 7; [0043] – “as shown in FIG. 7, two microstrip lines SL can be used to receive and output the signal. In this case, the microstrip line SL including the antenna element 11 may preferably be arranged to be symmetric with respect to the center of the opening of the pseudo waveguide 4.” The broadest reasonable interpretation of the claim limitation in light of the specification includes the interpretation that “by a second proximity coupling” merely describes how the waveguide supplies the signal, but does not place a limitation on how the signal is received by the antenna element. Signal is supplied from the waveguide 4 by second proximity coupling at a second resonant patch PT. That signal is later received by a second antenna element 11. See Response to Remarks section above.) and
a transmission/reception unit configured to:
transmit a transmission signal with the antenna device, (Fig. 1; [0031] – “a high frequency signal outputted from the transmission/reception circuit is supplied to the antenna element 11 via the converter section 5 in the outer layer L8, the pseudo waveguide 4 and the converter section 5 in the outer layer L1.) and
receive a reception signal with the antenna device; (Fig. 1; [0031] – “then, the signal received by the antenna element 11 is supplied to the transmission/reception circuit via the converter section 5 in the outer layer L1, the pseudo waveguide 4 and the converter section 5 in the outer layer L8.”) and
Nishikawa teaches:
a radar device mounted on a vehicle, ([col. 1, para. 1] – “planar array antenna formed of a microstrip conductor and capable of being used as a transmission/reception antenna of a radar mounted on a vehicle.”)
the radar device including an antenna device including ([col. 1, para. 1] – “planar array antenna formed of a microstrip conductor and capable of being used as a transmission/reception antenna of a radar mounted on a vehicle.”)
a vehicle control unit configured to control an operation of the vehicle based on a sensing result of the radar device. ([col. 3, lines 15-20] – “The above-described microstrip array antennas have the advantages of a thin shape and high productivity, and are therefore widely applied to systems used in the microwave band. Further, in the millimeter-wave band, they are applied to on-vehicle radars for collision prevention or ACC (Adaptive Cruise Control).”)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have applied Nishikawa’s known technique to Aoki’s known method ready for improvement to yield predictable results. Such a finding is proper because (1) Aoki teaches a base microstrip antenna array; (2) Nishikawa teaches use of microstrip antenna array for vehicle radar and vehicle control; (3) one of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that applying the known technique would have yielded predictable results and resulted in a system with decreased interference; and (4) no additional findings based on the Graham factual inquiries are necessary, in view of the facts of the case under consideration, to explain a conclusion of obviousness (See MPEP 2143).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 4-6, 9, 15-16 objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
The following is an examiner’s statement of reasons for indicating allowable subject matter: The closest prior art of record (US 20160336654 A1 to Aoki; US 5724042 A to Komatsu; US 11777230 B2 to Zhu; US 6424298 B1 to Nishikawa) neither teaches nor fairly renders obvious the combinations set forth in claims 4-6, 9, 15-16. See analysis regarding claims 4 and 9 below. Dependent claims indicated allowable at least as depending from indicated allowable claims.
Regarding claim 4,
Aoki teaches the invention as claimed and discussed above.
Aoki further teaches:
The antenna device according to claim 2, comprising:
a power feeding unit configured to receive the signal supplied from the waveguide and(Figs. 1, 3; [0033] – “As shown in FIG. 3, in the waveguide formation section NP, each of the resonant patches PT forms a pattern similar to the shape of the waveguide formation section NP, not touching the ground pattern GP.”)
The prior art of record does not teach, in combination with the remaining elements of the claim:
a power feeding unit configured to receive the signal supplied from the waveguide and wirelessly supply the signal to the first end of the first antenna element by the first proximity coupling and to the second end of the second antenna element by the second proximity coupling.
Regarding claim 9,
Aoki teaches the invention as claimed and discussed above.
Aoki further teaches:
The antenna device according to claim 8, wherein the signal is (Figs. 3, 7)
The prior art of record does not teach, in combination with the remaining elements of the claim:
The antenna device according to claim 8, wherein the signal is wirelessly supplied to the first end of the first antenna element through the first aperture by the first proximity coupling, and the signal is wirelessly supplied to the second end of the second antenna element through the second aperture by the second proximity coupling.
Any comments considered necessary by applicant must be submitted no later than the payment of the issue fee and, to avoid processing delays, should preferably accompany the issue fee. Such submissions should be clearly labeled “Comments on Statement of Reasons for Allowance.”
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.
Contact Information
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JULIANA CROSS whose telephone number is (571)272-8721. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri 9am-5pm Pacific time.
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, William Kelleher can be reached on (571) 272-7753. 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.
/JULIANA CROSS/Examiner, Art Unit 3648
/William Kelleher/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3648
Prosecution Insights