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 .
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 5/18/26 has been entered.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112:
The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention.
Claim 11 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention.
In Claim 11, the limitation of the longest axis of the respective ports of the first and second branches to be orthogonal to each other in combination with the Claim 1 amended limitations of the first and second branches rotating gradually is new matter that does not appear to be described in the original disclosure. In the applicant’s specification (e.g. at [0040]), the embodiment described to have the ports of the two branches being orthogonal does not include a rotation of the branches, and only the embodiment having the two ports congruent/parallel has the rotating waveguide branches such as shown in applicant’s Fig. 1 (and such as in the combination of Claims 1 and 10).
The examiner suggests canceling Claim 11.
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)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1 and 4-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being clearly anticipated by Nesic et al. (US 2023/0213703 of record).
Nesic (e.g. including Fig. 3) teaches a dielectric waveguide including:
Regarding Claim 1, the dielectric waveguide configured as an orthomode transducer (OMT) (e.g. see [0039], the optical signals can be any type of electromagnetic radiation including in the microwave or terahertz frequencies, and the device is for orthogonal modes, e.g. see [0005] and [0021] thus the device is an orthomode transducer), a first branch (e.g. 330) for carrying a first linearly polarised wave; and a second branch (e.g. 340) for carrying a second linearly polarised wave (e.g. see [0049]), the dielectric waveguide having a dual-polarisation port (e.g. 210) comprising a first area (e.g. 230) and a second area (e.g. 240) which overlap partially, the first area and the second area being a cross-section of the first branch and a cross-section of the second branch respectively (e.g. see cross-shape formed by 230, 240, 210), wherein the dual-polarisation port has C4 or D4 symmetry (e.g. the Nesic structure Fig. 3 has the same cross-shaped/symmetry dual polarisation section formed by 210, 230, 240 such as described in the present application [0043-0044] and the port/cross 210 is invariant under rotations of 90 degrees because it is a cross shaped port having the extending portions of the cross spaced at 90 degrees in the same manner as applicant’s invention description of C4/D4 symmetry), wherein the dielectric waveguide multiplexes the polarisations with first, second and third physical ports such that the first port contains the combined (dual) polarisations and the second and third ports contain the individual plane polarisations, one of the second and third ports being associated with the first branch and the other of the second and third ports being associated with the second branch, and wherein the cross-section of the first branch and the cross-section of the second branch rotate gradually in space such that the polarisation vector of a wave in the first branch and the polarisation vector of a wave in the second branch rotate from a relative angle of 90 degrees at the dual polarisation port to a relative angle of zero or 180 degrees between the port of the first branch and the port of the second branch (e.g. see Fig. 3, the branches 340 and 330 rotate from parallel ports, i.e. the ports 360/350 are zero or 180 degree relationship to each other since they are parallel in the longitudinal axis of the ports and transition to the 90 degree angle at the dual port 210/230/240, and the rotation/twisting of the waveguide branches 340/330 can be seen in relation to the X axis and the Y axis in Fig. 3, the longest axis of the branches at ports 360/350 are at an angle between X and Y and they rotate along the length of the branches to the respective X and Y angles at 210 to be 90 degrees to each other) .
Regarding Claim 4, wherein the first branch and the second branch diverge gradually from each other in space (e.g. see Fig. 3, the branches 330/340 diverge apart towards 350/370, 360/380).
Regarding Claim 5, wherein the first branch and the second branch each have an elongated cross-section (e.g. see rectangular shape at 350/360 elongated widthwise/longitudinally).
Regarding Claim 6, wherein at least one of the cross-section of the first branch and the cross-section of the second branch rotates gradually in space relative to each other (e.g. see twisted form of 330 and 340, both branches rotate gradually).
Regarding Claim 7, wherein the first branch and the second branch are symmetric to each other under reflection by a plane that passes through the dual polarisation port (e.g. see Fig. 3 which is the same shape/symmetry as Fig. 1 of the present invention, and see [0072] and [0116]).
Regarding Claim 8, wherein a port of the first branch and a port of the second branch are spatially separate (e.g. ports 350 and 360 are spaced apart).
Regarding Claim 9, wherein the port of the first branch and the port of the second branch are congruent and have a same orientation (e.g. in Fig. 3 the ports 350 and 360 are oriented in the same direction and parallel, i.e. congruent and same orientation).
Regarding Claim 10, wherein a longest axis of the port of the first branch and a longest axis of the port of the second branch are orientated parallel to each other (e.g. the longitudinal directions of the rectangular shaped ports 350/360 are parallel to each other in Fig. 3).
Regarding Claim 11, wherein a longest axis of the port of the first branch and a longest axis of the port of the second branch are orientated orthogonal to each other (e.g. the longitudinal directions of the rectangular shaped ports 350/360 are orthogonal to each other in Fig. 4).
Regarding Claim 12, wherein a port of the first branch and a port of the second branch are partially overlapping and not parallel to each other (e.g. at dual polarisation port 210, the respective/individual ports of the branches 330 and 340 partially overlap to form the cross shape).
Regarding Claim 13, wherein the dielectric waveguide is made of a polymeric material (e.g. see [0043] each waveguide component including 10, 330, and 340 can be polymer, and see [0090], [0109]).
Regarding Claim 14, injecting a wave (e.g. 112 in Fig. 18) into a dielectric waveguide (10), the dielectric waveguide comprising: a first branch (e.g. 330) for carrying a first linearly polarised wave; and a second branch (e.g. 340) for carrying a second linearly polarised wave (e.g. see [0049]), the dielectric waveguide having a dual-polarisation port comprising a first area (e.g. 230) and a second area (e.g. 240) which overlap partially, the first area and the second area being a cross-section of the first branch and a cross-section of the second branch, respectively (e.g. at 210, 240, 230, a port is formed of partially overlapping cross-sections of branches 330 and 340 as a cross shape); wherein the dual-polarisation port has C4 or D4 symmetry (e.g. the Nesic structure Fig. 3 has the same cross-shaped/symmetry dual polarisation section formed by 210, 230, 240 such as described in the present application [0043-0044] and the port/cross 210 is invariant under rotations of 90 degrees because it is a cross shaped port having the extending portions of the cross spaced at 90 degrees in the same manner as applicant’s invention description of C4/D4 symmetry). See Claim 1 above for the new limitation subject matter.
Regarding Claim 15, wherein the dielectric waveguide is configured to spatially separate two orthogonally polarised components propagate in contrary directions at the dual-polarisation port (e.g. Fig. 4, 350 and 360 are contrary/orthogonal directions of orientation, also the use of the device to propagate in different/contrary directions is not patentable in an apparatus claim other than to describe the capability of the device, and the Nesic device is capable of the same functionality since it is the same structurally as the present invention disclosure).
Regarding Claim 16, wherein the dielectric waveguide is configured to spatially separate the two orthogonally polarised components propagate in a same direction at the dual-polarisation port (e.g. in Fig. 3, 350 and 360 are in the same directions of orientation, also the use of the device to propagate in the same directions is not patentable in an apparatus claim other than to describe the capability of the device, and the Nesic device is capable of the same functionality since it is the same structurally as the present invention disclosure).
Regarding Claim 17, a first branch (e.g. 330) for carrying a first linearly polarised wave; and a second branch (e.g. 340) for carrying a second linearly polarised wave, the dielectric waveguide having a dual-polarisation port (e.g. the cross shaped area 210, 230, 240) comprising a first area (e.g. 230) and a second area (e.g. 240) which overlap partially (e.g. see 210), the first area and the second area being a cross-section of the first branch and a cross-section of the second branch respectively, wherein: the first area and the second area intersect each other orthogonally such that a longest axis of the first area and a longest axis of the second are positioned at right angles to one another (e.g. see the cross shaped area 210 having the orthogonal overlap 230 and 240); the dual-polarisation port is provided with one of C4 or D4 symmetry (e.g. the Nesic structure Fig. 3 has the same cross-shaped/symmetry dual polarisation section formed by 210, 230, 240 such as described in the present application [0043-0044] and the port/cross 210 is invariant under rotations of 90 degrees because it is a cross shaped port having the extending portions of the cross spaced at 90 degrees in the same manner as applicant’s invention description of C4/D4 symmetry); at least one of the cross-section of the first branch and the cross-section of the second branch rotates gradually in space (e.g. see Fig. 3 which shows rotation of 330 and 340); and the port of the first branch and the port of the second branch are congruent (e.g. see Fig. 3, branches 350 and 360 are in the same orientation, rectangular cross-section shape, and angle and thus are congruent). See Claim 1 above for the new limitation subject matter.
Regarding Claim 18, wherein the dielectric waveguide is made of a polymeric material (e.g. see [0071], the waveguide coupling element, i.e. the waveguides 10/330/340, can be polymer).
Regarding Claim 19, wherein the port of the first branch and the port of the second branch have a same orientation (e.g. see Fig. 3, 350 and 360 are in the same orientation).
Regarding Claim 20, wherein the first branch and the second branch each have an elongated cross-section (e.g. see Fig. 3, branches 350 and 360 have elongated rectangular cross-sections).
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 5/18/26 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant argues that Nesic teaches optical coupling and mode separation but not an orthomode transducer.
This argument is not persuasive. Nesic clearly teaches that the reference to optical radiation/signals is not limited to light and can be microwave or terahertz radiation/signals (e.g. see [0039]) and the signals are orthogonal and coupled thus the device is the same as the present invention to form an orthomode transducer combining/separating orthomodes (e.g. see [0043-0044] and [0049]).
Applicant also argues that Nesic does not teach the claimed polarisation symmetry. This is not persuasive, since Nesic clearly shows and teaches the twisted rotation of the two branches 340/330 (e.g. see Fig. 3 and [0104], “continuous twist”) which is identical in structure to the present invention claims resulting in the ports of the branches being parallel (i.e. zero or 180 degrees to each other) at one end (e.g. at 360/350) and transitions to/from the dual port (210) where they are 90 degrees to each other.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to STEPHEN E JONES whose telephone number is (571)272-1762. The examiner can normally be reached 9AM to 5PM.
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, Andrea Lindgren Baltzell can be reached at 571-272-5918. 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.
/Stephen E. Jones/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2843
Prosecution Insights