Prosecution Insights
Last updated: July 17, 2026
Application No. 18/544,164

WIDE-ANGLE IMPEDANCE-MATCHING DEVICE FOR RADIATING-ELEMENT ARRAY ANTENNA AND METHOD OF DESIGNING SUCH A DEVICE

Final Rejection §112
Filed
Dec 18, 2023
Priority
Dec 22, 2022 — FR 2214203
Examiner
IMMANUEL, BAMIDELE ADEFOLARIN
Art Unit
2845
Tech Center
2800 — Semiconductors & Electrical Systems
Assignee
Centralesupelec
OA Round
2 (Final)
66%
Grant Probability
Favorable
3-4
OA Rounds
6m
Est. Remaining
84%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 66% — above average
66%
Career Allowance Rate
252 granted / 382 resolved
-2.0% vs TC avg
Strong +18% interview lift
Without
With
+17.9%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 1m
Avg Prosecution
24 currently pending
Career history
411
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.3%
-39.7% vs TC avg
§103
95.0%
+55.0% vs TC avg
§102
1.6%
-38.4% vs TC avg
§112
1.1%
-38.9% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 382 resolved cases

Office Action

§112
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 with respect to claim 1 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection. The Examiner appreciates the time and effort of the Applicant in the compact prosecution of this case. Claims 1-14 would be in condition for allowance if the 112 issues and objections are resolved. Claim Objections Claim 6 is objected to because of the following informalities: claim 6 recites “a metal pin of said assembly…”, however, it should read “an additional metal pin of said assembly” since this particular metal pin is different from “…a set of metal pins…” in claim 1. Appropriate correction is required. In addition, claim 8 should read “An antenna device comprising the radiating-element array antenna having the radiating-element array, able to radiate a field of transverse electromagnetic waves, and a wide-angle impedance-matching device according to claim 1 and positioned on said radiating-element array.” 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. Claims 1-14 are 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 claims contain 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 inventors, at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention. Claim 1 recites “…and a set of metal pins placed orthogonally, on at least one surface of the transmission screen, at the intersection of at least some of the respective anti-symmetry planes…”, however, the Specification has not described or disclosed this arrangement in a way to show that the Applicant is in possession of this invention. To satisfy the written description requirement, the patentee must “convey with reasonable clarity to those skilled in the art that, as of the filing date sought, he or she was in possession of the invention, and demonstrate that by disclosure in the specification of the patent. In addition, mere recitation of a claim limitation in the specification is not considered supporting the claim limitations. Claim 7 recites “…the metal pins are placed, at least partially, on the surface of the transmission screen opposite the first surface”, however, the Specification has not disclosed or described this limitation to explicitly show the partial arrangement claimed 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 inventors, at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention. A mere recitation of a claim limitation in a Specification does not satisfy the written description requirement. See Eli Lilly, 119 F.3d at 1568, 43 USPQ2d at 1406. 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 1-14 are 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. Claim 1 recites “…and a set of metal pins placed orthogonally, on at least one surface of the transmission screen, at the intersection of at least some of the respective anti-symmetry planes…”, however, the limitation is unclear as to what the Applicant refers to as at least some of the respective anti-symmetry plane. Claim 7 recites “…the metal pins are placed, at least partially, on the surface of the transmission screen opposite the first surface”, however, the limitation is unclear as to what the Applicant refers to as at least partially on the surface of the transmission screen opposite the first surface. It should be noted that the primary purpose of this requirement of definiteness of claim language is to ensure that the scope of the claims is clear so the public is informed of the boundaries of what constitutes infringement of the patent. A secondary purpose is to provide a clear measure of what applicants regard as the invention so that it can be determined whether the claimed invention meets all the criteria for patentability and whether the specification meets the criteria of 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, first paragraph with respect to the claimed invention. See MPEP 2173: Claims Must Particularly Point Out and Distinctly Claim the Invention [R-11.2013]. 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
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Dec 18, 2023
Application Filed
Jan 09, 2026
Non-Final Rejection mailed — §112
Apr 08, 2026
Response Filed
Jun 23, 2026
Final Rejection mailed — §112 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12676419
ANTENNA STRUCTURE AND ELECTRONIC DEVICE
1y 10m to grant Granted Jul 07, 2026
Patent 12672584
SEMICONDUCTOR DEVICES AND METHODS OF MANUFACTURING SEMICONDUCTOR DEVICES
3y 9m to grant Granted Jun 30, 2026
Patent 12665295
ELECTRONIC DEVICE COMPRISING PLURALITY OF ANTENNAS AND METHOD FOR OPERATING SAME
3y 1m to grant Granted Jun 23, 2026
Patent 12665301
ANTENNA STRUCTURE
2y 5m to grant Granted Jun 23, 2026
Patent 12658588
ANTENNA SYSTEM AND ELECTRONIC DEVICE
2y 4m to grant Granted Jun 16, 2026
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

Strategy Recommendation AI-generated — please review before filing

Get a prosecution strategy drawn from examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Typically takes 5-10 seconds — AI-generated, attorney review required before filing

Prosecution Projections

3-4
Expected OA Rounds
66%
Grant Probability
84%
With Interview (+17.9%)
3y 1m (~6m remaining)
Median Time to Grant
Moderate
PTA Risk
Based on 382 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allowance rate.

Sign in with your work email

Enter your email to receive a magic link. No password needed.

Personal email addresses (Gmail, Yahoo, etc.) are not accepted.

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month