DETAILED ACTION
Response to Arguments
Applicants' arguments filed 10/26/2025 have been fully considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
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.
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.
Claims 1-5, 12-14, and 24-25 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Li(US11916273B1) in view of BABIC(US20180280065A1).
Regarding claim 1, Li discloses
A system comprising: a first component (FIG.1A, Part.142A) a shaft extending from a surface of the first component (FIG.1A, Part.102) the shaft defining an axis of rotation (“ rotate along with the shaft 102 about the rotational axis 110.” [Col.10, ll.63-64]) and having a waveguide core (“waveguide section 112 is oriented along the rotational axis ” [Col.4, ll.24-25]);a second component mounted to the shaft and rotatable about the axis of rotation (FIG.1A, Part.142A);a radio-frequency (RF) transmitter unit disposed in the second component, the RF transmitter unit including a first antenna positioned at a first end of the shaft and oriented to transmit RF signals into the waveguide core of the shaft (“ Channel opening 136A of waveguide section 116 corresponds to channel opening 134A of waveguide section 112 to cause an electromagnetic signal transmitted via channel opening 134A “ [Col.5, ll.46-49]); and an RF receiver unit disposed in the first component, the RF receiver unit including a second antenna positioned at a second end of the shaft and oriented to receive the RF signals through the waveguide core of the shaft (“received through channel opening 136A,” [Col.5, ll.49-50]),[…]wherein the waveguide core of the shaft provides a waveguide for RF data transmissions between the first antenna and the second antenna (“rotary joint 150 is configured to facilitate the transmission of millimeter wave electromagnetic signals “ [Col.8, ll.27-28]).
Although Li does not limit the two sets of communication devices (142A&B) to radar communication, Li does not explicitly disclose that they may specifically operate in optical frequencies. Further, Li does not limit the two sets of communication devices (142A&B) to the same type of device disclosing that either could be of a plurality of sensor units or other electronic devices. BABIC discloses, an optical transmitter (“The probe 124 (or optical transmission device)”[0069]) unit disposed in the first component and optically coupled to the waveguide core of the shaft (“ the whole optical transmission device 101 contain a waveguide” [0064]): and an optical receiver unit disposed in the second component and optically coupled to the waveguide core of the shaft (“an optical detector 123” [0069]) […] and a line-of-sight transmission path for optical data transmissions between the optical transmitter unit and the optical receiver unit (“arranged such that there is a line of sight for an optical transmission device received in the internal chamber” [0040]).
BABIC teaches in the same field of Electromagnetic communication sensor systems. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Li with the teachings of BABIC to incorporate the features of an optical transmitter and receiver in line of sight so as to gain the advantage of improving reliability [0006, BABIC]. Also, since it has been held that if a technique has been used to improve one device, and a person of ordinary skill in the art would recognize that it would improve similar devices in the same way, using the technique is obvious unless its actual application is beyond his or her skill (MPEP 2143).
Regarding claim 2, Li as modified by BABIC discloses all the limitations of claim 1. Li discloses wherein, the RF data transmissions are in a millimeter-wave band (“ In some implementations, rotary joint 150 is configured to facilitate the transmission of millimeter wave electromagnetic signals” [Col.8, ll.26-28]).
Regarding claim 3, Li as modified by BABIC discloses all the limitations of claim 1. Li discloses wherein, the first antenna is configured to produce circularly polarized RE waves (“generate a polarized wave of a particular type including […] a circular polarized wave” [Col.8, ll.56-57]).
Regarding claim 4, Li as modified by BABIC discloses all the limitations of claim 1. Li discloses wherein, the waveguide core comprises a hollow core of the shaft. (“The rotary joint can include shaft with a first end, a second end, and a cavity” [Col.2, ll.37-38]).
Regarding claim 5, Li as modified by BABIC discloses all the limitations of claim 1. Li discloses wherein, the second component includes one or more sensors to generate data (“In some implementations, an electronic device represents one or more of a discrete antenna, an RF processing device (with or without an integrated antenna), or sensor unit, among other electronic devices.” [Col.7, ll.37-40]).
Regarding claim 12, Li as modified by BABIC discloses all the limitations of claim 1. Li discloses wherein, the second component includes: a sensor array (“ Channel opening 136A of waveguide section 116 corresponds to channel opening 134A of waveguide section 112 to cause an electromagnetic signal transmitted via channel opening 134A “ [Col.5, ll.46-49]); and a sensor controller coupled to the sensor array (FIG.1A, Part.142A),wherein the sensor controller is configured to provide data from the sensor array to the RF transmitter unit (“Electronic devices, such as discrete antennas or processing devices with integrated antennas can be coupled to each channel to transceiver electromagnetic signals” [Col.6, ll.1-3])and to receive configuration data for the sensor array from the optical receiver unit (“The LiDAR unit can send LiDAR sensing data to data processing system 530 using rotary joint 525.” [Col.17, ll.49-51]).
Regarding claim 13, Li as modified by BABIC discloses all the limitations of claim 1. Li discloses wherein the second end of the shaft is fixedly attached to the first component (“ the LiDAR unit can be coupled to the waveguide section 112 “ [Col.17, ll.47-48]).
Regarding claim 14, Li as modified by BABIC discloses all the limitations of claim 1. Li discloses wherein, the second component includes a lidar sensor array configured to produce data (“The LiDAR (including radar, if applicable) sensing data to determine distances to various objects in the environment” [Col.17, ll.65-67]) and wherein the RF transmitter unit is configured to transmit at least some of the data produced by the lidar sensor array (“ Channel opening 136A of waveguide section 116 corresponds to channel opening 134A of waveguide section 112 to cause an electromagnetic signal transmitted via channel opening 134A “ [Col.5, ll.46-49]).
Regarding claim 24, Li as modified by BABIC discloses all the limitations of claim 14. Li discloses wherein, the […] transmitter unit is configured to transmit configuration data for the lidar sensor array (The LiDAR (including radar, if applicable) sensing data to determine distances to various objects in the environment” [Col.17, ll.65-67]).
Although Li does not explicitly disclose that the communication devices (142A&B) operate in optical frequencies, Li does not limit the two sets of communication devices (142A&B) to the same type of device disclosing that either could be of a plurality of sensor units or other electronic devices. BABIC discloses the optical transmission and reception of data (0069]).
BABIC teaches in the same field of Electromagnetic communication sensor systems. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Li with the teachings of BABIC to incorporate the features of an optical transmitter and receiver in line of sight so as to gain the advantage of improving reliability [0006, BABIC]. Also, since it has been held that if a technique has been used to improve one device, and a person of ordinary skill in the art would recognize that it would improve similar devices in the same way, using the technique is obvious unless its actual application is beyond his or her skill (MPEP 2143).
Regarding claim 25, Li as modified by BABIC discloses all the limitations of claim 14. Li discloses wherein, the RF transmitter (“ Channel opening 136A of waveguide section 116 corresponds to channel opening 134A of waveguide section 112 to cause an electromagnetic signal transmitted via channel opening 134A “ [Col.5, ll.46-49]) unit and the RF receiver unit are configured to provide data transmission from the second component to the first component (“received through channel opening 136A,” [Col.5, ll.49-50]) with a first bandwidth (“ transmission of millimeter waves “ [Col.3, l.39]);
Although Li does not explicitly disclose that the communication devices (142A&B) operate in optical frequencies, Li does not limit the two sets of communication devices (142A&B) to the same type of device disclosing that either could be of a plurality of sensor units or other electronic devices. BABIC discloses, the optical transmitter unit (“The probe 124 (or optical transmission device)”[0069]) and the optical receiver unit (“an optical detector 123” [0069]) are configured to provide data transmission from the first component to the second component with a second bandwidth(“arranged such that there is a line of sight for an optical transmission device received in the internal chamber” [0040]); and the first bandwidth exceeds the second bandwidth by at least two orders of magnitude (“The optical detector 123 can resolve light with a wavelength substantially in the visible and infrared regions of the wavelength spectrum, such as from 400 nm to 1700 nm.” [0069])
BABIC teaches in the same field of Electromagnetic communication sensor systems. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Li with the teachings of BABIC to incorporate the features of an optical transmitter and receiver in line of sight so as to gain the advantage of improving reliability [0006, BABIC]. Also, since it has been held that if a technique has been used to improve one device, and a person of ordinary skill in the art would recognize that it would improve similar devices in the same way, using the technique is obvious unless its actual application is beyond his or her skill (MPEP 2143).
Claims 6 and 7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Li(US 11916273 B1) as modified by BABIC(US20180280065A1) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of in view of YAN(CN103956584A).
Regarding claim 6, Li as modified by BABIC discloses all of the limitations of claim 1. Li fails to set forth the patch antenna of claim 6. YAN teaches in the same field of endeavor of radar systems. YAN discloses the system wherein, each of the first antenna and the second antenna is a patch antenna having (“The radiation patch 32” [0011]).
YAN teaches in the same field of endeavor of radar systems. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Li as modified by BABIC with the teachings of Yan to incorporate the features of a patch antenna having a substrate and a printed metallic antenna shape so as to gain the advantage of reducing antenna volume[0028, Yan]. Also, since it has been held that if a technique has been used to improve one device, and a person of ordinary skill in the art would recognize that it would improve similar devices in the same way, using the technique is obvious unless its actual application is beyond his or her skill (MPEP 2143).
Regarding claim 7, Li as modified by BABIC and further modified by YAN discloses all of the limitations of claim 6. Li fails to set forth the difference in substrate thicknesses of claim 7. YAN teaches in the same field of endeavor of radar systems. YAN discloses the system wherein, the substrate of the first antenna has a first thickness and the substrate of the second antenna has a second thickness different from the first thickness (“Three different substrate thicknesses are designed according to the different bandwidths” [0024])
YAN teaches in the same field of endeavor of radar systems. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Li as modified by BABIC with the teachings of Yan to incorporate the features of separate substrate thicknesses so as to gain the advantage of reducing antenna volume [0028, Yan]. Also, since it has been held that if a technique has been used to improve one device, and a person of ordinary skill in the art would recognize that it would improve similar devices in the same way, using the technique is obvious unless its actual application is beyond his or her skill (MPEP 2143).
Claims 8 and 9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Li(US 11916273 B1) as modified by BABIC(US20180280065A1) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of in view of NIROO(US20190089069A1).
Regarding claim 8, Li as modified by BABIC discloses all of the limitations of claim 1. Li discloses the system wherein, […] the first antenna is a patch antenna mounted on a second side of the first printed circuit board opposite the first side of the first printed circuit board (Fig.3C, Part 142B); and the second side of the first printed circuit board is oriented toward the shaft (Fig.3C, Part 314).
Li does not explicitly disclose nor limit wherein RE transmitter chip is mounted on a different side of the PCB than the antenna. NIROO teaches in the same field of endeavor of radar systems. NIROO discloses the system wherein, the RE transmitter unit includes an RE transmitter chip mounted on a first side of a first printed circuit board (“a radio controller 108, which are mounted using BGA flip-chip assembly methodology on a side opposite to the antenna array 102” [0016]).
NIROO teaches in the same field of endeavor of radar systems. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Li as modified by BABIC with the teachings of NIROO to incorporate the features of a chip mounted on a different side of the PCB than the antenna so as to gain the advantage of improving short range communication performance [0030, NIROO]. Also, since it has been held that if a technique has been used to improve one device, and a person of ordinary skill in the art would recognize that it would improve similar devices in the same way, using the technique is obvious unless its actual application is beyond his or her skill (MPEP 2143).
Regarding claim 9, Li as modified by BABIC and further modified by NIROO discloses all of the limitations of claim 8. Li discloses the system wherein, the second antenna is a patch antenna mounted on a second side of the second printed circuit board opposite the first side of the second printed circuit board (Fig.3C, Part 142B); and the second side of the second printed circuit board is oriented toward the shaft (Fig.3C, Part 314).
Li does not explicitly disclose nor limit wherein RF transmitter chip is mounted on a different side of the PCB than the antenna. NIROO teaches in the same field of endeavor of radar systems. NIROO discloses the system wherein, the RF receiver unit includes an RF receiver chip mounted on a first side of a second printed circuit board (“a radio controller 108, which are mounted using BGA flip-chip assembly methodology on a side opposite to the antenna array 102” [0016]).
NIROO teaches in the same field of endeavor of radar systems. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Li as modified by BABIC with the teachings of NIROO to incorporate the features of a chip mounted on a different side of the PCB than the antenna so as to gain the advantage of improving short range communication performance [0030, NIROO]. Also, since it has been held that if a technique has been used to improve one device, and a person of ordinary skill in the art would recognize that it would improve similar devices in the same way, using the technique is obvious unless its actual application is beyond his or her skill (MPEP 2143).
Claim 10 is under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Li(US 11916273 B1) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of in view of Krall(US4274097A).
Regarding claim 10, Li as modified by BABIC discloses all of the limitations of claim 1. Li discloses the system wherein, the waveguide core of the shaft has a circular cross section (“In some implementations, the shape of the cavities of waveguide section 112 or waveguide section 116 can be the same shape as the cavity 106 of shaft 102“ [Col.6, ll.12-15]).
Li does not explicitly disclose nor limit wherein the waveguide diameter is selected to reduce electromagnetic modes. Krall teaches in the same field of endeavor of radar waveguide systems. Krall discloses the system wherein, and a diameter selected to reduce propagation of unwanted electromagnetic modes (“For maximum efficiency of mode excitation[…]requiring a rod diameter of 3.7 centimeters” [Col.7, ll.7-11]).
Krall teaches in the same field of endeavor of radar waveguide systems. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Li as modified by BABIC with the teachings of Krall to incorporate the features of waveguide diameter is selected to reduce electromagnetic modes so as to gain the advantage of improving mode excitation efficiency [Col.7, ll.7-11, Krall]. Also, since it has been held that if a technique has been used to improve one device, and a person of ordinary skill in the art would recognize that it would improve similar devices in the same way, using the technique is obvious unless its actual application is beyond his or her skill (MPEP 2143).
Documents Considered but not Relied Upon
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to the applicant’s Disclosure.
SUWA(JP2016208411A) is considered analogous art to the instant application as it discloses in [0021] “The feeding antenna element 3 is formed, for example, from a glass cloth/epoxy resin copper clad laminate meeting the FR-4.0 grade.”
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.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CLAYTON PAUL RIDDER whose telephone number is (571)272-2771. The examiner can normally be reached Monday thru Friday 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, Jack Keith can be reached on (571) 272-6878. 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.
/C.P.R./Examiner, Art Unit 3646
/JACK W KEITH/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3646
Prosecution Insights