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 .
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
1. 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.
2. Claims 1 – 15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Shriner et al. (US 2020/0053490) in view of Ortiz, Sean, Toni Ivanov, and Amir Mortazawi. “A transmit-receive Spatial amplifier array.” In 1997 IEEE MTT-s Internation Microwave Symposium Digest, vol. 2, pp. 679-682. IEEE, 1997.
Regarding claim 1, Shriner teaches that cell of a transmit array adapted to implementing a full-duplex communication (Fig. 2, 3 and pages 4, paragraphs 39 – 44). Shriner teaches that a first antenna element located on a first surface of the cell (Fig. 3, 4 and pages 4, paragraphs 41 – pages 5, paragraphs 51, where teaches there are two parch antennas, and first antenna locating on first surface on the cell), a second antenna element located on a second surface of the cell, opposite to the first surface (Fig. 3, 4 and pages 4, paragraphs 41 – pages 5, paragraphs 51, where teaches there are two parch antennas or more, and second antenna locating on second surface on the cell, and these antennas disposed anywhere on cell), a transmit channel comprising, between the first and second antenna elements, a first phase-shift and amplifier circuit (Fig. 3, 4 and pages 4, paragraphs 41 – pages 5, paragraphs 51, where teaches the best spacing between antenna elements of a phased array antenna arrangement is typically λ/4 or greater (e.g., λ/2), where λ is the wavelength of the intended signal to be transmitted and received by the phased array antenna, and first antenna and second antenna coupling with first shift and amplifier), and a receive channel comprising, between the first and second antenna elements, a second phase-shift and amplifier circuit (Fig. 3, 4 and pages 4, paragraphs 41 – pages 5, paragraphs 51, where teaches the best spacing between antenna elements of a phased array antenna arrangement is typically λ/4 or greater (e.g., λ/2), where λ is the wavelength of the intended signal to be transmitted and received by the phased array antenna, and first antenna and second antenna coupling with second shift and amplifier).
Shriner does not specifically disclose the limitation “a second antenna element located on a second surface of the cell, opposite to the first surface”. However, Ortiz teaches the limitation “a second antenna element located on a second surface of the cell, opposite to the first surface” (see Fig 1, 2, abstract, “Introduction” section, and “Design” section, where teaches there are two patch antennas, transmitting and receiving patch antenna, the two patch antennas located on different layer, and second surface opposite to the first surface). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention was made to modify the Shriner’s structure and performance as taught by Ortiz, provide the motivation to improve signal reception transmission quality and communication performance.
Regarding claim 2, Shriner does not specifically teach the limitation “the transmit channel is adapted to transmitting a first signal having a first polarization state, and the receive channel is adapted to receiving a second signal having a second polarization state, different from the first polarization state”. However, Ortiz teaches the limitation “the transmit channel is adapted to transmitting a first signal having a first polarization state, and the receive channel is adapted to receiving a second signal having a second polarization state, different from the first polarization state” (see Fig 1, 2, abstract, “Introduction” section, and “Design” section, where teaches transmitting first signal having a first, horizontally, polarization state, and receiving second signal having a second, vertical, polarization state, different polarization state each other). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention was made to modify the Shriner’s structure and performance as taught by Ortiz, provide the motivation to improve signal reception transmission quality and communication performance.
Regarding claim 3, Shriner and Ortiz teach all the limitation as discussed in claim 2. Furthermore, Ortiz further teaches that the first and second signals have orthogonal linear polarizations (see Fig 1, 2, abstract, “Introduction” section, and “Design” section).
Regarding claim 4, Shriner and Ortiz teach all the limitation as discussed in claim 2. Furthermore, Ortiz further teaches that the first and second signals have circular and linear polarizations, respectively (see Fig 1, 2, abstract, “Introduction” section, and “Design” section).
Regarding claim 5, Shriner teaches that each of the first and second antenna elements comprises a substantially square-shaped conductive plane and first and second ports respectively located in the vicinity of adjacent first and second sides of the conductive plane (Fig. 2, 3 and pages 3, paragraphs 36 – pages 4, paragraphs 44).
Regarding claim 6, Shriner teaches that the first and second ports of the first antenna element are respectively located vertically in line with the first and second ports of the second antenna element (Fig. 2, 3 and pages 3, paragraphs 36 – pages 4, paragraphs 44).
Regarding claim 7, Shriner teaches that the first and second ports of the first antenna element are respectively coupled, by the first and second phase-shift and amplifier circuits (Fig. 2 teaches antenna coupling with first, second, third, phase shift and amplifier), to the first and second ports of the second antenna element (Fig. 2, 3, 4 and pages 3, paragraphs 32 – pages 5, paragraphs 51).
Regarding claim 8, Shriner teaches that the first and second ports of the first antenna element are respectively coupled, by the first and second phase-shift and amplifier circuits, to the second and first ports of the second antenna element (Fig. 2, 3, 4 and pages 3, paragraphs 32 – pages 5, paragraphs 51).
Regarding claim 9, Shriner and Ortiz teach all the limitation as discussed in claim 1. Furthermore, Ortiz further teaches that Shriner teaches that first and second ground planes (see Fig. 2) interposed between the first antenna element and the second antenna element (see Fig 1, 2, abstract, “Introduction” section, and “Design” section).
Regarding claim 10, Shriner and Ortiz teach all the limitation as discussed in claim 1. Furthermore, Shriner further teaches that the first and second phase-shift and amplifier circuits are interposed between the first and second ground planes (Fig. 2, 3, 4 and pages 3, paragraphs 32 – pages 5, paragraphs 51).
Regarding claim 11, Shriner and Ortiz teach all the limitation as discussed in claim 1. Furthermore, Ortiz further teaches that the first and second antenna elements and the first and second ground planes are formed in conductive levels of a printed circuit board (Fig 1, 2, abstract, “Introduction” section, and “Design” section).
Regarding claim 12, Shriner and Ortiz teach all the limitation as discussed in claim 1. Furthermore, Shriner further teaches that the transmit and receive channels each comprise a phase-shift circuit and an amplifier circuit series-connected (Fig. 2) between the first antenna element and the second antenna element (Fig. 2, 3, 4 and pages 3, paragraphs 32 – pages 5, paragraphs 51).
Regarding claim 13, Shriner and Ortiz teach all the limitation as discussed in claim 1. Furthermore, Shriner further teaches that Transmit array comprising a plurality of cells (Fig. 2, 3, 4 and pages 3, paragraphs 32 – pages 5, paragraphs 51).
Regarding claim 14, Shriner and Ortiz teach all the limitation as discussed in claim 1. Furthermore, Shriner further teaches that the first antenna element of each cell is electrically isolated from the first antenna element of each of the other cells (Fig. 2, 3, 4 and pages 3, paragraphs 32 – pages 5, paragraphs 51), and the second antenna element of each cell is electrically isolated from the second antenna element of each of the other cells (Fig. 2, 3, 4 and pages 3, paragraphs 32 – pages 5, paragraphs 51).
Regarding claim 15, Shriner and Ortiz teach all the limitation as discussed in claim 1. Furthermore, Ortiz further teaches that at least one source configured to irradiate a surface of the array (Fig 1, 2, abstract, “Introduction” section, and “Design” section).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Bergamo (US 2009/0103593) discloses Array Antenna System and Spread Spectrum Beamformer Method.
Information regarding...Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system... at 866-217-9197 (toll-free)."
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JOHN J LEE whose telephone number is (571)272-7880. The examiner can normally be reached on Mon-Fri (8:00am-5:00pm).
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, Yuwen Pan can be reached on 571-272-7855. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
J.L
January 23, 2026
John J Lee
/JOHN J LEE/
Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2649
/YUWEN PAN/ Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2649