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 .
Drawings
The drawings are objected to because Fig 2 contains the letter designation “g” for both the step between “f” and “h” as well as that between “h” and “k” which should be designated as “j” instead. Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
Specification
The specification is objected to as failing to provide proper antecedent basis for the claimed subject matter. See 37 CFR 1.75(d)(1) and MPEP § 608.01(o). Correction of the following is required: the meaning of “a waveguide metal sidewall” as claimed is not clear from the specification as no waveguide structure or operation is disclosed. Additionally, what is meant by the claimed “medium mask layer” or “top medium layer” is likewise not disclosed. It is understood that the layer is benzocyclobutene (BCB), but it is unclear what is “medium” about it.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 1-18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Regarding claim 1, it is unclear what is intended by the limitation “a waveguide metal sidewall” as there is no disclosure or support in the claims or specification as to what waveguide is present or intended to be manufactured. Additionally, it is unclear what is meant by a “medium mask layer” as there is no disclosure or support in the specification for what is intended by “medium” as the word has many potential meanings.
Regarding claim 3 it is additionally unclear what “etching is conducted with a size of 421 µm” is intended to claim as etching is a process that is not associated with a particular size per se. Without further details it is unknown if that dimension is meant to be the remaining thickness of the etched layer, the amount of thickness removed by the etch or some aspect of the etching tools or something else entirely.
Regarding claim 5, there is again a limitation of “etching… with a size of 79 µm” which is unclear for the same reasons as that detailed regarding claim 3 above.
All claims contain the unclear subject matter of claim 1 and as such are likewise unclear.
As it cannot be established what applicant is intending to claim to the degree that a meaningful search or examination on the merits, no prior art rejections are being made at this time. This should not be taken to indicate that any claims would be allowed if the above deficiencies were corrected.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DANIEL P SHOOK whose telephone number is (571)270-7890. The examiner can normally be reached 9:00 am - 5:00 pm, Mon-Fri.
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 KRAIG can be reached at (571)272-8660. 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.
/DANIEL P SHOOK/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2896
Prosecution Insights