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 .
Priority
Applicant’s claim for the benefit of a prior-filed application under 35 U.S.C. 119(e) or under 35 U.S.C. 120, 121, 365(c), or 386(c) is acknowledged.
Response to Amendment
The amendments filed on August 29th 2025 have been entered. Claims 1-26 are currently pending. Applicants’ amendments to claims have overcome the objections set forth in the Non-Final Office Action mailed on May 30th 2025.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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.
Claim(s) 1-5, 7, and 9-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Martek et al. (IDS Reference US 20020021246A1) in view of Naruse (US 11264732 B2).
Regarding Claim 1, Martek et al. discloses an advanced system, AAS, comprising a plurality of antenna elements (Phased array panel antenna 400 with a plurality of antenna elements 410 as seen in figure 4 of Martek et al.),
where the AAS extends on a surface (S) defined by a normal vector (N), where an x-direction (x) at a point (P) on the surface (S) is parallel to the normal vector (N) at the point (P), where a z-direction (z) at the point (P) on the surface (S) is tangent to the surface (S) and orthogonal to the x-direction (x), where a y direction (y) at the point (P) on the surface (S) is tangent to the surface (S) and orthogonal to both the x-direction (x) and the z-direction (z) (Antenna 400 is disposed on a surface wherein a x direction is parallel to a normal vector and y and z directions are orthogonal to it as seen in annotated figure 4 of Martek et al.),
where the antenna elements are arranged in a plurality of columns extending in the z-direction on the surface, where each of the plurality of column comprise at least two antenna elements (Antennas are arranged into multiple columns a4-h4 at least including 3 as seen in which extend in the z-direction on the surface of the antenna 400 wherein each column comprises at least 2 antenna elements 410; Paragraph 56-62 and figure 4 of Martek et al.).
Martek et al. fails to explicitly disclose where the plurality of columns comprise a reference column and one or more offset columns, where each of the one or more offset columns are separately arranged in the z-direction relative to the reference column according to a set of determined offset values.
However, Martek et al. does suggest where the plurality of columns comprise a reference column and one or more offset columns, where each of the one or more offset columns are separately arranged in the z-direction relative to the reference column according to a set of determined offset values (Taking any column from c4-f4 as a reference column we can see that we have a first column b4/g4 which has a first offset distance from the reference and a second column a4/h4 which has a second offset distance from the column wherein the first and second offset difference differ from each other and offset distances can be changed if needed and these off set distance form a set of offset distances wherein determining these offset distances and separately arranging the columns would be inherent when placing the antenna columns on the array and offsets serve as a set of determined offset values chosen specifically for side lobe level control; Paragraph 62 and figure 4 of Martek et al.).
However, Naruse also discloses where the plurality of columns comprise a reference column and one or more offset columns, where each of the one or more offset columns are separately arranged in the z-direction relative to the reference column according to a set of determined offset values (Antenna module can have multiple columns of antenna elements wherein a second column can serve as a reference column that is not moved and columns 1 and 3 can be offset columns that are moved up by a pre-determined offset distance Dy where Dy may be a set of determined offset values ranging from 0mm to 1.25mm and each antenna group of a column may be separately arranged wherein direction labeled z is parallel to the normal vector and as such can serve as a x direction and the direction labeled y is tangent and orthogonal to the x-direction and as such can serve as a z-direction; Paragraph 20-24 and 68-98 as well as figure 2 and 6).
Therefore, it would have been obvious before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art modify the antenna as taught by Martek et al. to have where the plurality of columns comprise a reference column and one or more offset columns, where each of the one or more offset columns are separately arranged in the z-direction relative to the reference column according to a set of determined offset values as taught by Naruse to suppress sidelobes and obtain the desired radiation pattern (Paragraphs 111-115 and 155 of Naruse).
PNG
media_image1.png
711
447
media_image1.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image2.png
665
433
media_image2.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image3.png
464
762
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Regarding Claim 2, Martek et al. further discloses where the antenna elements are at least partly arranged in subarrays, where each sub-array comprises at least two antenna elements arranged extending in the z-direction (z) (Antenna columns form 8 subarrays a4-h4 wherein each of them comprise at least 2 antenna elements; Paragraph 56 and figure 4 of Martek et al.).
Regarding Claim 3, Martek et al. further discloses where each sub-array in the AAS comprises the same number of antenna elements (All of the subarrays comprise 4 antenna elements in each of them; Paragraph 56 and figure 4 of Martek et al.).
Regarding Claim 4, Martek et al. further discloses where at least one sub-array in the AAS comprises a different number of antenna elements compared to at least one other sub-array of the AAS (Antenna elements in column can be changed such that one column can have different number of elements than another column; Paragraph 56 and figure 4 of Martek et al.).
Regarding Claim 5, Martek et al. further discloses where at least one sub-array is of a different size measured as an area on the surface (S), and/or has a different antenna element separation measured along the surface (S), compared to at least one other sub-array of the AAS (Sub-arrays b4/h4 and a4/h4 have different sizes on the area of the surface as well as different spacing between its elements compared to c4-f4; Paragraphs 56-62 and figure 4 of Martek et al.).
Regarding Claim 7, Martek et al. further discloses where the surface (S) is a plane and where the AAS is a planar antenna array (Antenna structure 400 is a planar array wherein the surface is a plane; Paragraph 56 and figure 4 of Martek et al.).
Regarding Claim 9, Martek et al. further discloses where the set of determined offset values (O) are configured symmetrically about a z-direction central axis (Z-A) of the AAS (Offset distances for a4-h4 are configured symmetrically and thus would be symmetric to a central axis of the antenna and columns a4/h4 are reduced in length by one antenna element length relative to an untouched reference column like c4 thus serving as an offset and columns b4/g4 are offset by half of that aka ½ antenna length wherein these offsets are a set of values chosen specifically for side lobe level control and thus serve as a set of determined values; Paragraph 56-62 and figure 4 of Martek et al.).
Examiner’s note - Regarding the recitation that an element is “configured to” perform a function, it is the position of the office that such limitations are not positive structural limitations, and thus, only require the ability to so perform. In this case the prior art applied herein is construed as at least possessing such ability. When the structure recited in the reference is substantially identical to that of the claims, claimed properties or functions are presumed to be inherent. The Courts have held that it is well settled that where there is a reason to believe that a functional characteristic would be inherent in the prior art, the burden of proof then shifts to the applicant to provide objective evidence to the contrary. See In re Schreiber, 128 F.3d at 1478, 44 USPQ2d at 1478, 44 USPQ2d at 1432 (Fed. Cir. 1997) (see MPEP § 2112.01, I.).
Regarding Claim 10, Martek et al. further discloses where the set of determined offset values (O) of the one or more columns relative to the reference column (REF) are at least 0.1 wavelengths at a center frequency of a transmission frequency band associated with the AAS (Reduced length columns a4/h4 are offset by a one antenna length and columns b4/g4 are offset by half of that aka ½ antenna length and with antenna have a quarter wavelength then the offset would be at least .1 of the wavelength wherein offsets serve as a set of determined offset values chosen specifically for side lobe level control; Paragraph 56-62 and figure 4 of Martek et al.).
Regarding Claim 11, Martek et al. further discloses where the set of determined offset values (O) of the one or more columns relative to the reference column (REF) of the AAS are at most 1.5 wavelengths at the center frequency of the transmission frequency band associated with the AAS (Reduced length columns a4/h4 are offset by a one antenna length and columns b4/g4 are offset by half of that aka ½ antenna length and with antenna have a quarter wavelength then the offset would be at most 1.5 of the wavelength and offsets serve as a set of determined offset values chosen specifically for side lobe level control; Paragraph 56-62 and figure 4 of Martek et al.).
Regarding Claim 12, Martek et al. further disclose where a magnitude of a difference between the a first offset value of the set of determined offset values and a second offset value of the set of determined offset values is larger than 0.1 wavelengths, at the center frequency of the transmission frequency band associated with the AAS (Reduced length columns a4/h4 are offset by a one antenna length serving as a first offset and columns b4/g4 are offset by half of that aka ½ antenna length serving as a second offset wherein the difference between offsets would be greater than .1 of the wavelength and offsets serve as a set of determined offset values chosen specifically for side lobe level control; Paragraph 56-62 and figure 4 of Martek et al.).
Regarding Claim 13, Although Martek et al. does not explicitly disclose, where the set of determined offset values (O) are configured with a mean-squared deviation from an average offset distance. Martek et al. does disclose where the set of determined offset values (O) are configured with a mean-squared deviation (B4/g4 and a4/h4 comprise different offset distance which would comprise a means squared deviation and offsets serve as a set of determined offset values chosen specifically for side lobe level control; Paragraph 56-62 and figure 4 of Martek et al.).
Therefore, it would have been obvious before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art modify the antenna as taught by Martek et al. to have a mean-squared deviation from an average offset distance of between 0.05 and 0.3 wavelengths squared at the center frequency of the transmission frequency band associated with the AAS since it has been held that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or workable ranges involves only routine skill in the art. In re Aller, 105 USPQ 233 (CCPA 1955). The motivation would stem from the fact that setting/changing the offset distances allows for control over the side lobe (Paragraph 62 of Martek et al.).
Examiner’s note - Regarding the recitation that an element is “configured to” perform a function, it is the position of the office that such limitations are not positive structural limitations, and thus, only require the ability to so perform. In this case the prior art applied herein is construed as at least possessing such ability. When the structure recited in the reference is substantially identical to that of the claims, claimed properties or functions are presumed to be inherent. The Courts have held that it is well settled that where there is a reason to believe that a functional characteristic would be inherent in the prior art, the burden of proof then shifts to the applicant to provide objective evidence to the contrary. See In re Schreiber, 128 F.3d at 1478, 44 USPQ2d at 1478, 44 USPQ2d at 1432 (Fed. Cir. 1997) (see MPEP § 2112.01, I.).
Regarding Claim 14, Although Martek et al. fails to explicitly disclose where the set of determined offset values (O) are configured with a mean offset of between 0.3 wavelengths and 0.7 wavelengths. Martek et al. does disclose the set of determined offset values (O) are configured with a mean offset of between 0.3 wavelengths and 0.7 wavelengths (Offset are between a full length of the antenna element and half the length of an antenna element so would naturally have a mean offset of ¾ of an antenna length which with an antenna of a quarter wavelength would result in a mean offset of .1875 wavelength and offsets serve as a set of determined offset values chosen specifically for side lobe level control; Paragraph 56-62 and figure 4 of Martek et al.).
Therefore, it would have been obvious before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art modify the antenna as taught by Martek et al. to have where the offset distances (O) are configured with a mean offset of between 0.3 wavelengths and 0.7 wavelengths since it has been held that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or workable ranges involves only routine skill in the art. In re Aller, 105 USPQ 233 (CCPA 1955). The motivation would stem from the fact that setting/changing the offset distances allows for control over the side lobe (Paragraph 62 of Martek et al.).
Examiner’s note - Regarding the recitation that an element is “configured to” perform a function, it is the position of the office that such limitations are not positive structural limitations, and thus, only require the ability to so perform. In this case the prior art applied herein is construed as at least possessing such ability. When the structure recited in the reference is substantially identical to that of the claims, claimed properties or functions are presumed to be inherent. The Courts have held that it is well settled that where there is a reason to believe that a functional characteristic would be inherent in the prior art, the burden of proof then shifts to the applicant to provide objective evidence to the contrary. See In re Schreiber, 128 F.3d at 1478, 44 USPQ2d at 1478, 44 USPQ2d at 1432 (Fed. Cir. 1997) (see MPEP § 2112.01, I.).
Regarding Claim 15, Martek et al. further discloses where the set of determined offset values (O) of the one or more offset columns are configured to reduce a sidelobe magnitude generated by the AAS (Offset of the antenna columns results in an aperture tapering which allows for side lobe control to reduce them and offsets serve as a set of determined offset values chosen specifically for side lobe level control; Paragraph 54 and 62 of Martek et al.).
Examiner’s note - Regarding the recitation that an element is “configured to” perform a function, it is the position of the office that such limitations are not positive structural limitations, and thus, only require the ability to so perform. In this case the prior art applied herein is construed as at least possessing such ability. When the structure recited in the reference is substantially identical to that of the claims, claimed properties or functions are presumed to be inherent. The Courts have held that it is well settled that where there is a reason to believe that a functional characteristic would be inherent in the prior art, the burden of proof then shifts to the applicant to provide objective evidence to the contrary. See In re Schreiber, 128 F.3d at 1478, 44 USPQ2d at 1478, 44 USPQ2d at 1432 (Fed. Cir. 1997) (see MPEP § 2112.01, I.).
Regarding Claim 16, Martek et al. further discloses where an antenna element comprises any of a patch antenna element, crossed dipole, and a slot antenna element (Antenna elements utilized in array 400 may be patch or slot antennas; Paragraph 57 of Martek et al.).
Regarding Claim 17, Martek et al. further discloses where each offset value of the set of determined offset values with respect to the z-direction reference position (R) of the AAS is measured from a first or last antenna element position in z-direction of each column (Offset distances of the columns can be measured the first antenna elements of c4-f4 since they are placed an antenna elements length off and offsets serve as a set of determined offset values chosen specifically for side lobe level control; Paragraph 56-62 and figure 4 of Martek et al.).
Regarding Claim 18, Martek et al. further discloses where each offset value of the set of determined offset values with respect to the z-direction reference position (R) of the AAS is measured from a mean antenna element position in z-direction of each column (Offset distance can also be measured from the first antenna element of b4 and g4 which would serve as a mean antenna element since it is spaced evenly apart from the first antenna element of a4/c4 or f4/h4 and offsets serve as a set of determined offset values chosen specifically for side lobe level control; Paragraph 56-62 and figure 4 of Martek et al.).
Regarding Claim 19, Martek et al. discloses a wireless device comprising an advanced antenna system (Wireless device may be radio transmitter/receiver or a radio frequency modem which may comprise the advanced antenna system; Paragraph 84 and 103 of Martek et al.), AAS, comprising a plurality of antenna elements (Phased array panel antenna 400 with a plurality of antenna elements 410 as seen in figure 4 of Martek et al.),
where the AAS extends on a surface (S) defined by a normal vector (N), where an x-direction (x) at a point (P) on the surface (S) is parallel to the normal vector (N) at the point (P), where a z-direction (z) at the point (P) on the surface (S) is tangent to the surface (S) and orthogonal to the x-direction (x), where a y direction (y) at the point (P) on the surface (S) is tangent to the surface (S) and orthogonal to both the x-direction (x) and the z-direction (z) (Antenna 400 is disposed on a surface wherein a x direction is parallel to a normal vector and y and z directions are orthogonal to it as seen in annotated figure 4 of Martek et al.),
where the antenna elements are arranged in a plurality of columns extending in the z-direction on the surface, where each of the plurality of columns column comprises at least two antenna elements (Antennas are arranged into multiple columns a4-h4 at least including 3 as seen in which extend in the z-direction on the surface of the antenna 400 wherein each column comprises at least 2 antenna elements 410; Paragraph 56-62 and figure 4 of Martek et al.).
Martek et al. fails to explicitly disclose where the plurality of columns comprise a reference column and one or more offset columns, where each of the one or more offset columns are separately arranged in the z-direction relative to the reference column according to a set of determined offset values.
However, Martek et al. does suggest where the plurality of columns comprise a reference column and one or more offset columns, where each of the one or more offset columns are separately arranged in the z-direction relative to the reference column according to a set of determined offset values (Taking any column from c4-f4 as a reference column we can see that we have a first column b4/g4 which has a first offset distance from the reference and a second column a4/h4 which has a second offset distance from the column wherein the first and second offset difference differ from each other and offset distances can be changed if needed and these off set distance form a set of offset distances wherein determining these offset distances and separately arranging the columns would be inherent when placing the antenna columns on the array; Paragraph 62 and figure 4 of Martek et al.).
However, Naruse also discloses where the plurality of columns comprise a reference column and one or more offset columns, where each of the one or more offset columns are separately arranged in the z-direction relative to the reference column according to a set of determined offset values (Antenna module can have multiple columns of antenna elements wherein a second column can serve as a reference column that is not moved and columns 1 and 3 can be offset columns that are moved up by a pre-determined offset distance Dy where Dy may be a set of determined offset values ranging from 0mm to 1.25mm and each antenna group of a column may be separately arranged wherein direction labeled z is parallel to the normal vector and as such can serve as a x direction and the direction labeled y is tangent and orthogonal to the x-direction and as such can serve as a z-direction; Paragraph 20-24 and 68-98 as well as figure 2 and 6).
Therefore, it would have been obvious before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art modify the antenna as taught by Martek et al. to have where the plurality of columns comprise a reference column and one or more offset columns, where each of the one or more offset columns are separately arranged in the z-direction relative to the reference column according to a set of determined offset values as taught by Naruse to suppress sidelobes and obtain the desired radiation pattern (Paragraphs 111-115 and 155 of Naruse).
Regarding Claim 20, Martek et al. further discloses a network node comprising an advanced antenna system (Advanced antenna system may be part of a radio frequency modem which would serve a network node since it can be used in communications), AAS, comprising a plurality of antenna elements (Phased array panel antenna 400 with a plurality of antenna elements 410 as seen in figure 4 of Martek et al.),
where the AAS extends on a surface (S) defined by a normal vector (N), where an x-direction (x) at a point (P) on the surface (S) is parallel to the normal vector (N) at the point (P), where a z-direction (z) at the point (P) on the surface (S) is tangent to the surface (S) and orthogonal to the x-direction (x), where a y direction (y) at the point (P) on the surface (S) is tangent to the surface (S) and orthogonal to both the x-direction (x) and the z-direction (z) (Antenna 400 is disposed on a surface wherein a x direction is parallel to a normal vector and y and z directions are orthogonal to it as seen in annotated figure 4 of Martek et al.),
where the antenna elements are arranged in a plurality of columns extending in the z-direction on the surface, where each of the plurality of columns column comprises at least two antenna elements (Antennas are arranged into multiple columns a4-h4 at least including 3 as seen in which extend in the z-direction on the surface of the antenna 400 wherein each column comprises at least 2 antenna elements 410; Paragraph 56-62 and figure 4 of Martek et al.).
Martek et al. fails to explicitly disclose where the plurality of columns comprise a reference column and one or more offset columns, where each of the one or more offset columns are separately arranged in the z-direction relative to the reference column according to a set of determined offset values.
However, Martek et al. does suggest where the plurality of columns comprise a reference column and one or more offset columns, where each of the one or more offset columns are separately arranged in the z-direction relative to the reference column according to a set of determined offset values (Taking any column from c4-f4 as a reference column we can see that we have a first column b4/g4 which has a first offset distance from the reference and a second column a4/h4 which has a second offset distance from the column wherein the first and second offset difference differ from each other and offset distances can be changed if needed and these off set distance form a set of offset distances wherein determining these offset distances and separately arranging the columns would be inherent when placing the antenna columns on the array; Paragraph 62 and figure 4 of Martek et al.).
However, Naruse also discloses where the plurality of columns comprise a reference column and one or more offset columns, where each of the one or more offset columns are separately arranged in the z-direction relative to the reference column according to a set of determined offset values (Antenna module can have multiple columns of antenna elements wherein a second column can serve as a reference column that is not moved and columns 1 and 3 can be offset columns that are moved up by a pre-determined offset distance Dy where Dy may be a set of determined offset values ranging from 0mm to 1.25mm and each antenna group of a column may be separately arranged wherein direction labeled z is parallel to the normal vector and as such can serve as a x direction and the direction labeled y is tangent and orthogonal to the x-direction and as such can serve as a z-direction; Paragraph 20-24 and 68-98 as well as figure 2 and 6).
Therefore, it would have been obvious before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art modify the antenna as taught by Martek et al. to have where the plurality of columns comprise a reference column and one or more offset columns, where each of the one or more offset columns are separately arranged in the z-direction relative to the reference column according to a set of determined offset values as taught by Naruse to suppress sidelobes and obtain the desired radiation pattern (Paragraphs 111-115 and 155 of Naruse).
Claim 6 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Martek et al. (IDS Reference US 20020021246A1) in view of Naruse (US 11264732 B2) and Ota et al. (JP 2014230257A).
Regarding Claim 6, Martek et al. and Naruse fail to explicitly disclose where the surface (S) is a non-planar developable surface.
However, Ota et al. does disclose where the surface (S) is a non-planar developable surface (Surface upon which antenna elements 23 are installed on may be a non-planar surface in the form of a gently curved surface wherein one column of antenna elements may be offset form another column; Pg. 8-11 and figure 2 of Ota et al.).
Therefore, it would have been obvious before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art modify the antenna as taught by Martek et al. and Naruse to have where the surface (S) is a non-planar developable surface as taught by Ota et al. to apply the antenna in different apparatuses like a base station (Pg. 11 of Ota et al.) and also allow it to be fit into different places.
Claim 8 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Martek et al. (IDS Reference US 20020021246A1) in view of Naruse (US 11264732 B2) and Jelloul et al. (IDS Reference WO 2005055362A1).
Regarding Claim 8, Martek et al. fails to discloses where each of the one or more offset columns are also separately arranged in the x-direction relative to the reference column according to a second set of determined offset values (O’).
However, Jelloul et al. does disclose where each of the one or more offset columns are also separately arranged in the x-direction relative to the reference column according to a second set of determined offset values (O’) (Planar antenna structure includes a first, second, and third antenna array 10a-b, 20c, and 30a-b where each includes at least on antenna element and wherein arrays 10 and 30 have a height Z1/Z2 which is different from the height Z3 of array 20c thus casing 20C to be offset in the x-direction from the other antenna arrays wherein 20c may be offset a second set of offset values ranging between 55-82 mm wherein these values would have to be determined; Abstract and Pg. 9 as well as figure 5 of Jelloul et al.).
Therefore, it would have been obvious before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art modify the antenna as taught by Martek et al. to have where at least one of the columns is also arranged offset (O') in the x-direction as taught by Jelloul et al. so the arrays may be spaced from the plane such that they operate in different frequency bands (Abstract and Pg. 9 of Jelloul et al.).
PNG
media_image4.png
561
568
media_image4.png
Greyscale
Claim(s) 21-26 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Martek et al. (IDS Reference US 20020021246A1) in view of Naruse (US 11264732 B2) and Veysoglu et al. (US 11664593B1).
Regarding Claim 21, Martek et al. further discloses a method for designing an advanced antenna system (Invention includes a method that would be used to design the antenna 400 as described; Paragraph 103 of Martek et al.), AAS comprising a plurality of antenna elements, where the AAS extends on a surface (S) defined by a normal vector (N), where an x-direction (x) at a point (P) on the surface (S) is parallel to the normal vector (N) at the point (P), where a z-direction (z) at the point (P) on the surface (S) is tangent to the surface (S) and orthogonal to the x-direction (x), where a y direction (y) at the point (P) on the surface (S) is tangent to the surface (S) and orthogonal to both the x-direction (x) and the z-direction (z) (Antenna 400 is disposed on a surface wherein a x direction is parallel to a normal vector and y and z directions are orthogonal to it as seen in annotated figure 4 of Martek et al.),
the method comprising;
configuring (S1) the antenna elements in a plurality of columns extending in the z-direction (z), where each of the plurality of columns comprise at least two antenna elements, (Antennas are arranged into multiple columns a4-h4 at least including 3 as seen in which extend in the z-direction on the surface of the antenna 400 wherein each column comprises at least 2 antenna elements 410; Paragraph 56-62 and figure 4 of Martek et al.).
Although Martek et al. fails to explicitly disclose a computer implemented method for designing an advanced antenna system, AAS and where the plurality of columns comprise a reference column and one or more offset columns, determining (S2) respective column offset values (O) for each of the one or more offset columns in the z-direction, thereby forming a set of determined offset values, and designing (S3) the AAS by separately arranging the plurality of columns of the AAS according to the set of determined offset values. Martek et al. does suggest where the plurality of columns comprise a reference column and one or more offset columns, determining (S2) respective column offset values (O) for each of the one or more offset columns in the z-direction, thereby forming a set of determined offset values (Taking any column from c4-f4 as a reference column we can see that we have a first column b4/g4 which has a first offset distance from the reference and a second column a4/h4 which has a second offset distance from the column, forming one or more offset columns, wherein offset distances can be changed if needed thus forming a set of determined offset values wherein the pattern of the antennas are pre-determined so the offset would be too and wherein offsets serve as a set of determined offset values chosen specifically for side lobe level control; Paragraph 44 and 62 as well figure 4 of Martek et al.), and designing (S3) the AAS by separately arranging the plurality of columns of the AAS according to the set of determined offset values (The planar antenna systems have a pre-determined pattern and antenna 400 has columns which are arranged based on the offset pattern and arranging the columns separately based on their offset distances would be inherent when making the antenna; Paragraph 44 and 62 as well as figure 4 of Martek et al.).
However, Veysoglu et al. does disclose a computer implemented method for designing an advanced antenna system, AAS (Antenna array structure 300/400 comprises antenna module 102 with a plurality of antenna elements in columns with some being offset and a method of manufacturing using printing which would be done by a computer and methods of the invention may be implemented by instructions on a computer readable storage; Paragraph 32, 60-63, and 99-100 as well figure 4a of Veysoglu et al.).
Naruse also discloses where the plurality of columns comprise a reference column and one or more offset columns, determining (S2) respective column offset values (O) for each of the one or more offset columns in the z-direction, thereby forming a set of determined offset values, and designing (S3) the AAS by separately arranging the plurality of columns of the AAS according to the set of determined offset values (Antenna module can have multiple columns of antenna elements wherein a second column can serve as a reference column that is not moved and columns 1 and 3 can be offset columns that are moved up by a pre-determined offset distance Dy where Dy may be a set of determined offset values ranging from 0mm to 1.25mm and each antenna group of a column may be separately arranged based on the set of determined offset values wherein direction labeled z is parallel to the normal vector and as such can serve as a x direction and the direction labeled y is tangent and orthogonal to the x-direction and as such can serve as a z-direction; Paragraph 20-24 and 68-98 as well as figure 2 and 6).
Therefore, it would have been obvious before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art modify the antenna as taught by Martek et al. to have a computer implemented method for designing an advanced antenna system, AAS as taught by Veysoglu et al. since antenna systems have tight manufacturing tolerances (Paragraph 32) and a computer implemented method provides greater precision and speed. It would have been further obvious before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art modify the antenna as taught by Martek et al. and Veysoglu et al. to have where the plurality of columns comprise a reference column and one or more offset columns, determining (S2) respective column offset values (O) for each of the one or more offset columns in the z-direction, thereby forming a set of determined offset values, and designing (S3) the AAS by separately arranging the plurality of columns of the AAS according to the set of determined offset values as taught by Naruse to suppress sidelobes and obtain the desired radiation pattern (Paragraphs 111-115 and 155 of Naruse).
Regarding Claim 22, Martek et al. further discloses determining the respective column offset values by computer simulation and/or by laboratory experimentation (Offsets distances used by the column are predetermined and thus would be made with laboratory experimentation which would be inherent and wherein offsets serve as a set of determined offset values chosen specifically for side lobe level control; Paragraph 44-45 and 62 of Martek et al.).
Regarding Claim 23, Martek et al. further discloses wherein the computer simulation and/or the laboratory experimentation is associated with an objective function comprising sidelobe magnitude (Offset distances cause tapering of the columns of the planar array wherein the offsetting comprises a function of side lobe level control; Paragraph 62 of Martek et al.).
Regarding Claim 24, Martek et al. further discloses wherein the computer simulation and/or the laboratory experimentation is associated with an objective function comprising a main lobe pattern (Antenna 400 is designed to create a main lobe 610 with side lobes 620/630 wherein the main lobe designed to be main form of radiation; Paragraph 65 and figure 6 of Martek et al.).
Regarding Claim 25, Martek et al. further discloses wherein the computer simulation and/or the laboratory experimentation is associated with an objective function comprising a transmission mask pattern. (Antenna 400 is designed to have a radiation pattern with a main lobe 610 and side lobes 620/630 wherein an antenna would be designed to have a transmission mask pattern; Paragraph 65 and figure 6 of Martek et al.).
Regarding Claim 26, Martek et al. fails to disclose a computer program product comprising a non-transitory computer readable medium storing a computer program comprising instructions on processing circuitry cause the processing circuitry to carry out the method.
However, Veysoglu et al. discloses a computer program product comprising a non-transitory computer readable medium storing a computer program comprising instructions on processing circuitry cause the processing circuitry to carry out the method (Computer readable storage medium 1116 may contain a set of instructions to employ methodologies or functions of the invention; Paragraph 99-100 of Veysoglu et al.).
Therefore, it would have been obvious before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art modify the antenna as taught by Martek et al. to have a computer program product comprising a non-transitory computer readable medium storing a computer program comprising instructions on processing circuitry cause the processing circuitry to carry out the method as taught by Veysoglu et al. since antenna systems have tight manufacturing tolerances (Paragraph 32) and a computer implemented method provides greater precision and speed.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1, 19, 20, and 21 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on the combination of references applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). 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.
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure
US 20220163623 A1 (KISHIGAMI; Takaaki et al.) discloses a planar antenna structure comprising antenna elements in columns with some of the columns offset in the Z-Direction.
US 20180309210 A1 (SUDO; Kaoru) discloses a planar antenna structure comprising antenna elements in columns with some of the columns offset in the Z-Direction.
EP 3804030 B1 (JAKOBSSON PETER et al.) discloses a planar antenna structure comprising antenna elements in columns with some of the columns offset in a X-direction.
US 11515622 B2 (Hou; XiaoHua et al.) discloses an antenna array comprising multiple columns with some columns being offset from each other.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to GURBIR SINGH whose telephone number is (703)756-4637. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Thursday 8 a.m. - 5 p.m. ET.
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, Dameon E Levi can be reached at (571)272-2105. 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.
/DAMEON E LEVI/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2845
/GURBIR SINGH/Examiner, Art Unit 2845
Prosecution Insights