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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 November 25th, 2025 has been entered.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed November 25th, 2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant argues that because of the dielectric body present in Eubanks, the antenna cannot be a continuous homogenous conductive body. However, Eubanks teaches that the dielectric volume may contain no dielectric material, and can be used only for a base for fabrication. Therefore, a person of ordinary skill in the art would find it reasonable to use the dielectric of Eubank for manufacturing, and to remove it before use.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 3, 7, 8, 9, and 11 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Claims 3, 7, 8, 9, and 11 recites the limitation "unitary component.” There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
These claims will be considered as best understood in light of the specs.
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 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 1-17 and 19-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Eubanks et al. (WO 2024192431 A1), herein referred to as Eubanks.
Regarding claim 1, Eubanks discloses an antenna assembly comprising: an electrically conductive ground plane (210); a signal pin (see fig. 2a, “connector” between transmission line and radiator) adjacent to the ground plane (210); and a tapered conductive surface (205) coupled to the signal pin being continuously tapered (See fig. 2A) with respect to the signal pin, the tapered conductive surface (205), symmetric about an axis (se fig. 2A) passing through the signal pin, and orthogonal to the ground plane (210), wherein the signal pin, the ground plane, and the tapered conductive surface are portions of a single, continuous, homogenous metallic body manufactured as a monolithic structure (para. 0111).
Eubanks does not specifically disclose no dielectric or other non-conductive material is between the ground plane, the signal plane, and the tapered conductive.
However, Eubanks teaches in para. 0098, “in certain embodiments, a dielectric volume may include one or more voids that do not contain dielectric material”.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having skill in the art at the effective filing date of the invention to apply the teachings of Eubanks and make Eubanks’ antenna assembly wherein no dielectric or other non-conductive material is between the ground plane, the signal plane, and the tapered conductive in order to reduce overall weight and facilitate radiation in certain modes (para. 0099).
Regarding claim 2, Eubanks renders obvious all limitations of base claim 1.
Eubanks also discloses further comprising a support structure (110) extending from the ground plane (210) to the tapered conductive surface (205).
Regarding claim 3, Eubanks renders obvious all limitations of base claim 2.
Eubanks also discloses wherein the unitary component further includes the support structure (para. 0103).
Regarding claim 4, Eubanks renders obvious all limitations of base claim 2.
Eubanks also discloses wherein the support structure is coupled to an outer edge of the tapered conductive surface (See fig. 2A, support structure 110 covers entirety of the outside of the conductive surface).
Regarding claim 5, Eubanks renders obvious all limitations of base claim 2.
Eubanks also discloses wherein the support structure is coupled to a center region of the tapered conductive surface (See fig. 2A, support structure 110 covers entirety of the outside of the conductive surface).
Regarding claim 6, Eubanks renders obvious all limitations of base claim 1.
Eubanks also discloses further comprising a cover (para. 0113, “conductive top hat”) over the tapered conductive surface (205) thereby forming a hollow region (air-filled, para. 0089) between the cover (conductive top hat) and the tapered conductive surface (205).
Regarding claim 7, Eubanks renders obvious all limitations of base claim 6.
Eubanks also discloses wherein the unitary component further includes the cover (conductive top hat).
Regarding claim 8, Eubanks renders obvious all limitations of base claim 1.
Eubanks also discloses further comprising an infill material (para. 0089) adjacent to one side of the tapered conductive surface (205).
Eubanks does not specifically disclose wherein the unitary component further includes the infill material.
However, Eubanks does also disclose, in para. 0098-0099, and 0111, that the device can be additively manufactured, including combining components for ease of manufacturing.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date to apply the teachings of Eubanks and make the antenna of Eubanks wherein the unitary component further includes the infill material, to simplify manufacturing (para. 0098-0099, 0111).
Regarding claim 9, Eubanks renders obvious all limitations of base claim 1.
Eubanks also discloses further comprising a feed line (230) electrically coupled to the signal pin (connector).
Eubanks does not specifically disclose wherein the feed line is integral with the unitary component.
However, Eubanks discloses, in para. 0098-0099, and 0111, that the device can be additively manufactured, including combining components for ease of manufacturing.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date to apply the teachings of Eubanks and make the antenna of Eubanks wherein the feed line is integral with the unitary component, to simplify manufacturing (para. 0098-0099, 0111).
Regarding claim 10, Eubanks renders obvious all limitations of base claim 9.
Eubanks also discloses wherein the feed line (230) includes a coaxial cable (para. 0094) hermetically sealed with a vacuum, an air, a gas, or a solid dielectric therein (para 0094, fig. 1, transmission-line dielectric).
Regarding claim 11, Eubanks renders obvious all limitations of base claim 1.
Eubanks also discloses further comprising an impedance matching element (para. 0098).
Eubanks does not specifically disclose wherein the impedance matching element is integral with the unitary component.
However, Eubanks discloses, in para. 0098-0099, and 0111, that the device can be additively manufactured, including combining components for ease of manufacturing.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date to apply the teachings of Eubanks and make the antenna of Eubanks wherein the impedance matching element is integral to the unitary component, to simplify manufacturing (para. 0098-0099, 0111).
Regarding claim 12, Eubanks discloses a method of fabricating an antenna assembly, the method comprising: additively manufacturing (para. 0111) a tapered signal pin (connector at radiator and feed, see fig. 2A) adjacent to a ground plane (210); and additively manufacturing (para. 0111) a tapered conductive surface (205) coupled to the signal pin, the tapered conductive surface being continuously tapered with respect to a taper of the signal pin (see fig. 2A), symmetric about an axis passing through the signal pin, and orthogonal to the ground plane (see fig. 2A), the tapered conductive surface (205) including an additively manufactured material (para. 0111), wherein the signal pin, the ground plane, and the tapered conductive surface are portions of a single, continuous, homogenous metallic body manufactured as a monolithic structure (para. 0111).
This embodiment of Eubanks does not specifically disclose wherein no dielectric or other non-conductive material is between the ground plane, the signal plane, and the tapered conductive surface.
However, Eubanks teaches in para. 0098, “in certain embodiments, a dielectric volume may include one or more voids that do not contain dielectric material”.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having skill in the art at the effective filing date of the invention to apply the teachings of Eubanks and make Eubanks’ antenna assembly wherein no dielectric or other non-conductive material is between the ground plane, the signal plane, and the tapered conductive in order to reduce overall weight and facilitate radiation in certain modes (para. 0099).
Regarding claim 13, Eubanks renders obvious all limitations of base claim 12.
Eubanks also discloses further comprising additively manufacturing (para. 0119) the ground plane (210), wherein the ground plane (210) and the tapered conductive surface (205) are a contiguous unitary component (from additively manufacturing on each other).
Regarding claim 14, Eubanks renders obvious all limitations of base claim 12.
Eubanks further discloses further comprising additively manufacturing (para. 0104) a support structure (110) extending from the ground plane (210) to the tapered conductive surface (205).
Regarding claim 15, Eubanks renders obvious all limitations of base claim 14.
Eubanks further discloses wherein the support structure is coupled to at least one of an outer edge of the tapered conductive surface and a center region of the tapered conductive surface (See fig. 2A, support structure 110 covers entirety of the outside of the conductive surface).
Regarding claim 16, Eubanks renders obvious all limitations of base claim 12.
Eubanks also discloses further comprising additively manufacturing a cover (para. 0113, “conductive top hat”) over the tapered conductive surface (205) thereby forming a hollow region (air-filled, para. 0089) between the cover (conductive top hat) and the tapered conductive surface (205).
Regarding claim 17, Eubanks renders obvious all limitations of base claim 12.
Eubanks also discloses further comprising additively manufacturing (para. 0098) an infill material (para. 0089) adjacent to one side of the tapered conductive surface (205).
Regarding claim 19, Eubanks discloses an antenna array (2370, para. 0380) assembly comprising: a plurality of antenna assemblies arranged in an array, each of the antenna assemblies including an electrically conductive ground plane (210); a signal pin (see fig. 2a, “connector” between transmission line and radiator) adjacent to the ground plane (210); and a tapered conductive surface (205) coupled to the signal pin, the tapered conductive surface (205) being symmetric (see fig. 2A) about an axis passing through the signal pin and orthogonal to the ground plane (210), wherein the signal pin, the ground plane, and the tapered conductive surface are portions of a single, continuous, homogenous metallic body manufactured as a monolithic structure (para. 0111).
This embodiment of Eubanks does not specifically disclose wherein no dielectric or other non-conductive material is between the ground plane, the signal plane, and the tapered conductive.
However, Eubanks teaches in para. 0098, “in certain embodiments, a dielectric volume may include one or more voids that do not contain dielectric material”.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having skill in the art at the effective filing date of the invention to apply the teachings of Eubanks and make Eubanks’ antenna assembly wherein no dielectric or other non-conductive material is between the ground plane, the signal plane, and the tapered conductive in order to reduce overall weight and facilitate radiation in certain modes (para. 0099).
Regarding claim 20, Eubanks renders obvious all limitations of base claim 19.
Eubanks does not specifically disclose wherein each of the antenna assemblies are integral with each other so as to form a contiguous unitary component.
However, Eubanks does disclose, in para. 0098-0099, and 0111, that the device can be additively manufactured, including combining components for ease of manufacturing.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date to apply the teachings of Eubanks and make the antenna of Eubanks wherein each of the antenna assemblies are integral with each other so as to form a contiguous unitary component, to simplify manufacturing (para. 0098-0099, 0111).
Claim 18 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Eubanks and further in view of Rafiee et al. (Rafiee, M., Granier, F., & Therriault, D. (2021). Advances in coaxial additive manufacturing and applications. Advanced Materials Technologies, 6(11), 2100356. https://doi.org/10.1002/admt.202100356), herein referred to as Rafiee.
Regarding claim 18, Eubanks renders obvious all limitations of base claim 12.
Eubanks further discloses further comprising a feed line(230) electrically coupled to the signal pin (see fig. 2A), wherein the feed line includes a coaxial cable sealed with a vacuum, an air, a gas, or a solid dielectric therein(para 0094, fig. 1, transmission-line dielectric).
Eubanks does not disclose wherein the feed line is additively manufactured.
However, Rafiee discloses a process of additively manufacturing coaxial cable (see attached).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior at the time of the effective filing date of the invention to combine the teachings of the references and make the method of Eubanks wherein the feed line is also additively manufactured, as taught by Rafiee, to improve manufacturing time (page 51 of attached, lines 7-11).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to BRANDON S WOODS whose telephone number is (571)270-1525. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8:30 am - 6:00 pm.
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 571-270-7893. 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.
/BRANDON SEAN WOODS/Examiner, Art Unit 2845
/DIMARY S LOPEZ CRUZ/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2845