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 .
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1-4, 6-8, 15-16 have been considered but are moot because of the new ground of rejection.
Claim Rejections – 35 U.S.C. 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, 3, 6, 7, 8 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Gomez et al. (2020/0266510).
Regarding Claim 1, Gomez et al. (2020/0266510) discloses an antenna array (“arrays of polarized radiating elements such as a horn antenna”, paragraph [0002]) comprising:
a radiating element (“... They are widely used in satellites telecommunications, radars, remote sensing...”, paragraph [0002]) configured to receive or transmit an electromagnetic signal (“linear polarizations of the electromagnetic waveguides”, paragraph [0003] and see annotated figure 13 below); and
an alignment horn (see annotated figures 10 and 13 below) attached to the radiating element (See annotated figure 13 below) (“Arrays of polarized radiating elements such as a horn antennas or waveguide apertures, paragraph [0002]) wherein the alignment horn comprises a detent end (see annotated figures 10 and 13 below. Detent end connects element 8 and elements 3, 4); and
PNG
media_image1.png
618
534
media_image1.png
Greyscale
wherein the alignment horn (component of fig. 8, paragraph 0096]) is manufactured together as a single element (made of one single part, paragraph [0096]) by a three-dimensional printing process (“by 3D printing”, paragraph [0096], Claim 12), such that manufacturing the single element does not require a separate joining process for joining separate components (Noted that Gomez does not require a separate joining process in his invention for joining separate components).
Although Gomez does not explicitly disclose that the radiating element is manufactured together as a single element with alignment horn by a three-dimensional printing process, Gomez teaches the advantages of 3D printing process such as easier to manufacture (paragraph [0089]), reducing perturbations caused by junctions and reducing the bulk and weight of the component (paragraph [0096]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to have manufactured the radiating elements and alignment horn together as a single element by a three-dimensional printing process in order to obtain the advantages as taught by Gomez such as reducing perturbations, bulk and weight of the product.
Regarding Claim 3, Gomez discloses the antenna array of claim 1, wherein the alignment horn further comprises a shaft (the elongated portion as a shaft. Please see annotated fig. 10 above, and figure 13 below);
wherein the detent end is attached to a distal end of the shaft (annotated figure 10 above); and
wherein a proximal end of the shaft (annotated figure 13 below) is attached to the radiating element (annotated figure 13 below).
PNG
media_image2.png
516
659
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Regarding Claim 6, Gomez discloses the antenna array of claim 1, wherein the antenna array comprises four radiating elements arranged in an orthogonal pair (Fig. 13 shows at least four radiating elements).
Regarding Claim 7, Gomez discloses the antenna array of claim 6, wherein the four radiating elements arranged in the orthogonal pair (e.g. right-angle pair) comprises:
a first dipole comprising a first radiating element (A, please see below labeled figure 13) (polarized radiating elements, paragraph [0002]. It is noted that polarization creates the dipole of the electric charges);
a second dipole comprising a second radiating element (B);
a third dipole comprising a third radiating element (C); and
a fourth dipole comprising a fourth radiating element (D) (Fig. 13 includes at least four dipole comprising four radiating elements).
Regarding Claim 8, Gomez discloses the antenna array of claim 6, wherein arrangement of the four radiating elements arranged in the orthogonal pair (Fig. 13) comprises:
a first radiating element (A) disposed adjacent to a second radiating element (B) such that a first- second gap exists between the first radiating element and the second radiating element;
the second radiating element (B) further disposed adjacent to a third radiating element (C) such that a second-third gap exists between the second radiating element and the third radiating element;
the third radiating element (C) further disposed adjacent to a fourth radiating element (D) such that a third-fourth gap exists between the third radiating element and the fourth radiating element; and
the fourth radiating element (D) further disposed adjacent to the first radiating element (A) such that a fourth-first gap exists between the fourth radiating element and the first radiating element (all the radiating elements show gaps among them.
PNG
media_image3.png
572
662
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Claim(s) 2 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Gomez et al. (2020/0266510) in view of Nagaisi et al. (2019/0310345).
Regarding Claim 2, as discussed above, Gomez essentially discloses the claimed invention but does not explicitly disclose that the detent end of the alignment horn comprises an ellipsoidal segment geometry.
However, Nagaisi et al. (2019/0310345) discloses an ellipsoidal sphere shape at the horn antenna (paragraph [0068)).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to have used ellipsoidal segment geometry at the detent end of the alignment horn in Gomez in order to obtain the desired shape of the structure as taught by Nagaishi.
Claim(s) 4 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Gomez et al. (2020/0266510) in view of Shmidov (12,350,015).
Regarding Claim 4, as discussed above, Gomez essentially discloses the claimed invention but does not explicitly disclose the antenna array of claim 1, wherein the alignment horn further comprises a shaft, and wherein the shaft comprises a conical frustrum geometry.
However, Shmidov (12,350,015) discloses the horn can be rectangular or conical in shape (Col. 5, lines 50-58).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to have used a conical frustrum geometry at the shaft in Gomez in order to obtain the desired shape of the structure to fit with the cable as taught by Shimidov.
Claim(s) 15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Gomez et al. (2020/0266510) in view of Yoshino et al. (2023/0387600).
Regarding Claim 15, as discussed above, Gomez essentially discloses the claimed invention but does not explicitly disclose the antenna array of claim 1, further comprising a dielectric insert that comprises: a stud comprising a stud thickness; and a horn receptacle forming a hole disposed through the stud thickness.
However, Yoshino et al. (2023/0387600) discloses a dielectric insert (dielectric block 31) that comprises a stud comprising thickness (fig. 19) and a horn receptacle (horn antenna 200) forming a hole (35) disposed through the stud thickness (paragraph [0148]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to have provided comprising a dielectric insert that comprises a stud comprising a stud thickness and a horn receptacle forming a hole disposed through the stud thickness in Gomez in order to reduce the thickness of the antennas as taught by Yoshino.
Claim(s) 16 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Gomez et al. (2020/0266510) in view of Yoshino et al. (2023/0387600) further in view of Shmidov (12,350,015).
Regarding Claim 16, as discussed above, Gomez in view of Yoshino essentially discloses the claimed invention but does not explicitly disclose the antenna array of claim 15, wherein the horn receptacle of the dielectric insert is configured to receive the alignment horn to aid in maintaining positioning of the radiating element, wherein at least a portion of the horn receptacle comprises a conical frustum geometry; and wherein the alignment horn further comprises a shaft configured to be disposed within the horn receptacle.
However, Shmidov (12,350,015) discloses the horn can be rectangular or conical in shape (Col. 5, lines 50-58).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to have used a conical frustrum geometry at the shaft in Gomez in view of Yoshino in order to obtain the desired shape of the structure to fit with the cable as taught by Shimidov.
Allowable subject matter
Claims 5, 9-14, 17-22 are 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.
Correspondence
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Examiner Wilson Lee whose telephone number is (571) 272-1824. Proposed amendment and interview agenda can be submitted to Examiner’s direct fax at (571) 273-1824.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, examiner’s supervisor, Alexander Taningco can be reached at (571) 272-8048. Papers related to the application may be submitted by facsimile transmission. Any transmission not to be considered an official response must be clearly marked "DRAFT". The official fax number is (571) 273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Center. Status information for published applications may be obtained from Patent Center. For more information about the Patent Center, see https://patentcenter.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Patent Center, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free).
/WILSON LEE/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2844