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 .
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 09/02/2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. Applicant argues that Khemakhem does not disclose a window seal. The Examiner disagrees. Khemakhem discloses a window seal in form of a rear plug to fit entirely within the hollow core of the of a waveguide in form of coaxial connector to both seal and provide an electrical path to provide a predictable level of impedance when connector is used to terminate an open circuit through a coaxial connector jack (Para. 0033, 0034).
If further efforts are made to clarify and fully define the invention, Applicant is advised to consider referencing specific paragraphs, column and line numbers, and/or figures from the cited prior art. While the citations provided are representative and mapped to individual claim limitations, other portions of the references may also be relevant. Incorporating such disclosures may assist the Applicant in preparing a more complete response to this Office Action.
Claim Objections
Claims 8, 11, 12, and 18-20 are objected to because of the following informalities: the claims recite "the circular window" instead of “the cylindrical window’ as previously recited in the claims.
Appropriate correction is required.
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.
Claims 1-5 and 10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Khemakhem et al. (US 20040014363).
Khemakhem et al. disclose;
Regarding claim 1:
(in Figs. 6, 8-10) a window/seal (30) for a circular waveguide (10 in Fig. 6), comprising: a right-circular cylindrical window (44) having an axis (10-10); an annular rib (50) surrounding and coaxial with the cylindrical window (44), an outer diameter of the annular rib (50) configured to fit closely within an inside diameter of the circular waveguide (20 of 10); and an annular recess (48) between the cylindrical window (44) and the annular rib (50).
Regarding claim 2:
an outside diameter of the cylindrical window (44) is equal to an inside diameter of the annular recess (48), and an outside diameter of the annular recess (48) is equal to an inside diameter of the annular rib (50; See Fig. 10).
Regarding claim 3:
an outside diameter of the cylindrical window (44) is equal to an inside diameter of the annular recess (48), and an outside diameter of the annular recess (48) is less than to an inside diameter of the annular rib (50; See Fig. 10).
Regarding claim 4:
further comprising: (in Figs. 6 and 17) a center conductor coaxial (216) with the cylindrical window (44 in 230).
Regarding claim 5:
wherein t1 is a length of the cylindrical window parallel to the axis, t2 is a depth, parallel to the axis, of the annular recess, t3 is a length, parallel to the axis of the annular rib, and t2<t1<t3 (see figure below).
PNG
media_image1.png
295
316
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 10:
a flange (52) to locate the window/seal (30) with respect to the circular waveguide (20 of 10).
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 text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
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 6-9 and 11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Khemakhem et al. (US 20040014363) in view of Doane (US Pat 5043629).
Regarding claims 6 and 7:
Khemakhem et al. are silent on that t1 is one-half wavelength at a frequency of operation as required by claim 6; and
t1 is one-quarter wavelength at a frequency of operation as required by claim 7.
Doane discloses coaxial waveguide (10) having a thickness of the central window that is one-half wavelength at a frequency of operation and one-quarter wavelength at a frequency of operation (Col. 10, Lines 4-9).
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to implement the thickness of the central window that is one-half wavelength at a frequency of operation and one-quarter wavelength at a frequency of operation as taught by Doane into the device of Khemakhem et al. for the benefit of providing a waveguide mode converter for converting high order microwave modes, as are commonly found in waveguide cavities of high power gyrotrons, to lower-order modes suitable for low-loss transmission (See Abstract).
Regarding claims 8, 9 and 11:
Khemakhem et al. are silent on that the d1 is an outside diameter of the window seal and an inside diameter of the annular recess, d2 is an outside diameter of the annular recess, and d1, d2, t2, and t8 are configured to provide an impedance transition region between the cylindrical waveguide and the circular window as required by claim 8;
the d1 is an outside diameter of the window seal and an inside diameter of the annular recess, d2 is an outside diameter of the annular recess, and d1, d2, t2, and t3 are configured to tune frequencies of one or more resonances to not fall within an operating frequency range of a waveguide circuit comprising the cylindrical waveguide and the window/seal as required by claim 9; and
the circular window and the annular rib comprise a dimensionally stable, low loss dielectric material suitable for outdoor use as required by claim 11.
Doane discloses d1 is an outside diameter (d6) of the window seal (20) and an inside diameter (d3) of the annular recess (36), d2 is an outside diameter (d4) of the annular recess (36), and d1 (d6), d2 (d4), t2 (d3), and t3 (d5) are configured to provide an impedance transition region between the cylindrical waveguide (12) and the circular window (14; Col. 7, Lines 6-9);
di is an outside diameter (d6) of the window seal (20) and an inside diameter (d3) of the annular recess (36), d2 is an outside diameter (d4) of the annular recess (36), and d1 (d6), d2 (d4), t2 (d3), and t3 (d5) are configured to tune frequencies of one or more resonances to not fall within an operating frequency range of a waveguide circuit comprising the cylindrical waveguide (12) and the window/seal (20; Col. 7, Lines 6-9); and
the circular window (14) and the annular rib (defined by 36) comprise a dimensionally stable, low loss dielectric material suitable for outdoor use (Col. 3, Lines 9-13).
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to implement the dimensions taught by Doane into the device of Khemakhem et al. for the benefit of achieving lower-order modes suitable for low-loss transmission (See Abstract; Col. 3, Lines 20-29).
Claim 12 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Khemakhem et al. (US 20040014363) in view of Gobel et al. (US 20130115784).
Regarding claim 12:
Khemakhem et al. are silent on that the circular window and the annular rib comprise a cross-linked polystyrene plastic material.
Gobel et al. disclose (in Figs. 1-3) the circular window (22) and the annular rib (12) comprise a dielectric material, such as polyethylene (PE) or polytetrafluoroethylene (PTFE) (Para. 0008, Lines 12-13; Para. 0021, Lines 4-8).
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to implement the circular window and the annular rib using polyethylene (PE) or polytetrafluoroethylene (PTFE) which is art substitute for cross-linked polystyrene (PS) plastic due to its mechanical and sustainability since the selection of a known material based on its suitability for its intended use supported a prima facie obviousness determination in Sinclair & Carroll Co. v.Interchemical Corp., 325 U.S. 327, 65 USPQ 297 (1945).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 13-22 are allowed. The following is an examiner's statement of reason for allowance:
The primary reasons for the indication of the allowability of claims 13-22 are:
Regarding claim 13, the prior art does not teach or fairly suggest in combination with other
claimed limitations a first connecting member body, a first circular waveguide extending through
the hub coaxial with the first connecting member body and terminating at a first port at an end
face of the first connecting member body, a first window/seal to seal the first port, and two or more pins extending radially from the first connecting member body; and a front-side feed network comprising: a second connecting member body comprising a cavity configured to fit over the first connecting member body, and two or more slots disposed around a perimeter of the cavity, each of the two or more slots configured to accept one of the two or more pins extending from the first connecting member body, a second circular waveguide coaxial with the cavity and terminating at a second port within the cavity, a second window/seal to seal the second port, a cap configured to fit over the second connecting member body, the cap including two or more L-shaped slots, each L-shaped slot to engage one of the two or more pins extending from the first connecting member body through the slots of the second connecting member; and a wave spring between an inside surface of the cap and a shoulder of the second connecting member body, the spring effective to urge the second port towards the first port when the two or more L-shaped slots of the cap are engaged with the two or more pins, wherein the first and second window/seals comprise: a right-circular cylindrical window having an axis; an annular rib surrounding and coaxial with the cylindrical window, an outer diameter of the annular rib configured to fit closely within an inside diameter of the circular waveguide; and an annular recess between the cylindrical window and the annular rib.
The closest prior art are US 20040014363, Figs. 6-7, and JP2019186223A, Figs. 3-9.
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. 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 BAMIDELE A. IMMANUEL whose telephone number is (571)272-9988. The examiner can normally be reached General IFP Schedule: Mon.-Fri. 8AM - 7PM (Hoteling).
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, Dimary Lopez can be reached at 5712707893. 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.
/BAMIDELE A IMMANUEL/Examiner, Art Unit 2845
/DIMARY S LOPEZ CRUZ/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2845