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 .
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 12-28-2023 is being considered by the examiner.
Specification
The abstract of the disclosure does not commence on a separate sheet in accordance with 37 CFR 1.52(b)(4) and 1.72(b). A new abstract of the disclosure is required and must be presented on a separate sheet, apart from any other text.
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.
The term “about” in claim 9 is a relative term which renders the claim indefinite. The term is not defined by the claim, the specification does not provide a standard for ascertaining the requisite degree, and one of ordinary skill in the art would not be reasonably apprised of the scope of the invention.
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.
Claim(s) 1-2 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Stjernman, et. al., U.S. patent Application Publication Number 2019/0190575, published June 20, 2019.
As per claim 1, Stjernman discloses an antenna (1) characterized in comprising at least one antenna panel (10), each comprising at least two groups (12a, 12b) of dipoles having a +45 degrees polarization and at least two groups (14a, 14b) of dipoles having a -45 degrees polarization, each group comprising at least one dipole (Stjernman, Fig. 1, 61 and 62 and ¶29),
two passive horizontal lobe shaping units, HLSUs, (30a, 30b) each comprising a directional coupler (Stjernman, Fig. 1, 21 and 22 and ¶25),
wherein the groups of +45 degrees polarized dipoles are directly connected to a first HLSU (30a) and the groups of -45 degrees polarized dipoles are directly connected to a second HLSU (Stjernman, Fig. 1, 21-24),
wherein the first HLSUs (30a) is configured to provide a 90 degrees phase shift between the signals from the two groups (12a, 12b) of +45 degrees polarized dipoles, and the second HLSU (30b) is configured to provide a 90 degrees phase shift between the signals from the two groups (14a, 14b) of -45 degrees polarized dipoles (Stjernman, ¶35).
As per claim 2, Stjernman further discloses the antenna according to claim 1, wherein the HLSUs (30a,30b) are directional couplers configured to shape the antenna lobe in a horizontal direction into two lobes (Stjernman, Fig. 6 and ¶25).
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.
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.
Claim(s) 4-7 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Stjernman.
As per claim 4, Stjernman discloses the four vertical lobe shaping units (Fig. 4, 40, 111, 112, 113) but fails to expressly disclose the interconnects.
Note that it has been held that rearranging parts of an invention involves only routine skill in the art. In re Japikse, 86 USPQ 70.
As per claim 5, Stjernman further discloses the antenna according to claim 4, wherein each VLSU (20a-d) is a splitter, combiner and/or amplitude- and phase distributor configured to shape the antenna lobe in a vertical direction (Stjernman, Fig. 4, 102).
As per claims 6 and 7, Stjernman further discloses stacked antenna panels (Stjernman, Fig. 1 and Fig. 3).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made, to contrive any number of desirable ranges for the layer limitation disclosed by Applicant, 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.
Claim(s) 3, 8 and 9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Stjernman in view of Timofeev, et. al., U.S. Patent Application Publication Number 2011/0205119, published August 25, 2011.
As per claims 3, 8 and 9, Stjernman discloses the antenna of claim 1 but fails to expressly disclose angles of the lobes.
Timofeev teaches multiple lobes with preferred angles (¶39).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made, to contrive any number of desirable ranges for the angle limitation disclosed by Applicant, 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.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure and is provided on form PTO-892.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MARCUS E WINDRICH whose telephone number is (571)272-6417. The examiner can normally be reached M-F ~7-3:30.
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, Jack Keith can be reached at 5712726878. 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.
/MARCUS E WINDRICH/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3646