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 .
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.
Response to Amendment
This is a response to Amendment/Req. Reconsideration-After Non-Final Rejection filed by Applicant on 06/10/2026.
Claims 1-19 are still pending.
Claims 1, 3, 5-11 and 13-17 have been amended.
Claims 9-16 have been withdrawn from consideration.
Response to Arguments
Claim Objection:
On Page 6 of Applicant’s Remarks, filed on 06/10/2026, Applicant states that “Claim 17 was objected to for certain informalities. In response, claim 17 is amended as suggested by the Examiner to recite proper antecedent basis for "the first transmission line." Accordingly, the applicant respectfully requests the objection to claim 17 be withdrawn.” Examiner has been able to corroborate the claim amendment; and therefore, the Claim Objection has been withdrawn.
Claim Rejection Under 35 U.S.C. §102:
Applicant’s arguments, see pages 6-8, filed 06/10/2026, with respect to the rejection(s) of claims 1 and 3-8 being rejected under AIA 35 U.S.C. § 102 as being anticipated by U.S. Pat. App. Pub. No. 2021/0194451 to Lin et al. (hereinafter "Lin"), have been fully considered and are persuasive. Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, a new ground(s) of rejection is made in view of Faiz et al. US 2021/0020589 in combination with the previously cited prior arts of record.
Specification
The amendment filed 06/10/2026 is objected to under 35 U.S.C. 132(a) because it introduces new matter into the disclosure. 35 U.S.C. 132(a) states that no amendment shall introduce new matter into the disclosure of the invention. The added material which is not supported by the original disclosure is as follows:
Claims 1, 3, 5-8 and 17 disclose the amended limitation “electromagnetic coupling”. There is no support in the Original Specification for this amended limitation.
Applicant is required to cancel the new matter in the reply to this Office Action.
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, 3, 5-8 and 17 a 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 claim(s) contains 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 inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention.
Claims 1, 3, 5-8 and 17 disclose the amended limitation “at least two or more composite fibers”. There is no support in the Original Specification for this amended limitation; as the Original Specification discloses “electromagnetic coupling”.
Claims 2-8 are also rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph as they further limit Claim 1.
Claims 18-19 are also rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph as they further limit Claim 17.
Please make the proper corrections.
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 1, 3, 5-8 and 17 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.
Claims 1, 2 and 10-12 disclose the amended limitation “electromagnetic coupling”. There is no support in the Original Specification for this amended limitation.
Claims 2-8 are also rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph as they further limit Claim 1.
Claims 18-19 are also rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph as they further limit Claim 1.
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election without traverse of Group I (Claims 1-8 and 17-19) in the reply filed on 01/13/2026 is acknowledged. Non-elected claims from Group II (Claims 9-16) have been withdrawn by Applicant.
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) 1 and 3-8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lin et al. US 2021/0194451 (Previously Cited; Hereinafter Lin) in view of Faiz et al. US 2021/0020589 (Newly Cited; Hereinafter Faiz).
Regarding claim 1, Lin teaches a broadband balun structure (Figs. 1-3C; wideband balun), comprising:
a single-ended port (Figs. 1-3C; Port 1);
a balanced port (Figs. 1-3C; Port 2);
a first transmission line (Figs. 1-3C; first transmission line, TL1) connected between the single-ended port (Figs. 1-3C; Port 1) and one side of the balanced port (Figs. 1-3C; Port 2); and
a second transmission line (Figs. 1-3C; second transmission line, TL2) connected to the other side of the balanced port (Figs. 1-3C; Port 2),
the first transmission line (Figs. 1-3C; first transmission line, TL1) positioned to allow coupling of a first portion of the first transmission line (Figs. 1-3C; first transmission line, TL1) simultaneously to both a second portion of the first transmission line (Figs. 1-3C; first transmission line, TL1) and a portion of the second transmission line (Figs. 1-3C; second transmission line, TL2).
Lin does not specifically teach allowing electromagnetic coupling.
However, Faiz does teach allowing electromagnetic coupling (Figs. 1A, 1B, 2A, 2B, 4A, 4B; [0007, 0048, 0091, 0092]; Claim 19; From [0048]: “Furthermore, tightly spacing the transmission line TLa and the transmission line TLb can provide electromagnetic coupling of both magnetic and electric fields, thereby providing further enhancing energy transfer between the transmission lines.”).
It would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the wideband balun of Lin by implementing the teachings of Faiz regarding allowing electromagnetic coupling; for the purpose of “allowing tighter spacing and higher coupling between the transmission lines relative to what is achievable if both transmission lines were continuous” (See Faiz; Abstract).
Regarding claim 3, the combination of Lin and Faiz teaches the broadband balun structure as claimed in claim 1, wherein Lin further teaches wherein the second portion of the first transmission line (Figs. 1-3C; first transmission line, TL1) is positioned to allow coupling simultaneously to a third portion of the first transmission line (Figs. 1-3C; first transmission line, TL1).
Lin does not specifically teach allowing electromagnetic coupling.
However, Faiz does teach allowing electromagnetic coupling (Figs. 1A, 1B, 2A, 2B, 4A, 4B; [0007, 0048, 0091, 0092]; Claim 19; From [0048]: “Furthermore, tightly spacing the transmission line TLa and the transmission line TLb can provide electromagnetic coupling of both magnetic and electric fields, thereby providing further enhancing energy transfer between the transmission lines.”).
It would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the wideband balun of Lin by implementing the teachings of Faiz regarding allowing electromagnetic coupling; for the purpose of “allowing tighter spacing and higher coupling between the transmission lines relative to what is achievable if both transmission lines were continuous” (See Faiz; Abstract).
Regarding claim 4, the combination of Lin and Faiz teaches the broadband balun structure as claimed in claim 1, wherein Lin further teaches wherein the transmission lines comprise one of stripline or microstrip ([0028]: “…a balun can be fabricated using transmission lines rather than lumped inductors. In a first example, a coupled transmission line balun can be formed using coplanar striplines, also referred to as micro-striplines…”).
Regarding claim 5, the combination of Lin and Faiz teaches the broadband balun structure as claimed in claim 4, wherein Faiz further teaches wherein the electromagnetic coupling comprises broadside coupling of parallel line portions (Figs. 1A, 1B, 2A, 2B, 4A, 4B; [0007, 0048, 0091, 0092]; Claim 19; From [0048]: “Furthermore, tightly spacing the transmission line TLa and the transmission line TLb can provide electromagnetic coupling of both magnetic and electric fields, thereby providing further enhancing energy transfer between the transmission lines.”).
Regarding claim 6, the combination of Lin and Faiz teaches the broadband balun structure as claimed in claim 4, wherein Faiz further teaches wherein the electromagnetic coupling comprises parallel-plate coupling of at least partially overlapped line portions on different layers (Figs. 1A, 1B, 2A, 2B, 4A, 4B; [0007, 0048, 0091, 0092]; Claim 19; From [0048]: “Furthermore, tightly spacing the transmission line TLa and the transmission line TLb can provide electromagnetic coupling of both magnetic and electric fields, thereby providing further enhancing energy transfer between the transmission lines.”).
Regarding claim 7, the combination of Lin and Faiz teaches the broadband balun structure as claimed in claim 4, wherein Faiz further taches wherein electromagnetically coupled portions of the first and second transmission lines are narrower than uncoupled portions of the first and second transmission lines (Figs. 1A, 1B, 2A, 2B, 4A, 4B; [0007, 0048, 0091, 0092]; Claim 19; From [0048]: “Furthermore, tightly spacing the transmission line TLa and the transmission line TLb can provide electromagnetic coupling of both magnetic and electric fields, thereby providing further enhancing energy transfer between the transmission lines.”).
Regarding claim 8, the combination of Lin and Faiz teaches the broadband balun structure as claimed in claim 4, wherein Faiz further teaches wherein electromagnetically coupled portions of the first and second transmission lines positioned to electromagnetically couple simultaneously to two other line portions are narrower than portions electromagnetically coupled to only one other line portion (Figs. 1A, 1B, 2A, 2B, 4A, 4B; [0007, 0048, 0091, 0092]; Claim 19; From [0048]: “Furthermore, tightly spacing the transmission line TLa and the transmission line TLb can provide electromagnetic coupling of both magnetic and electric fields, thereby providing further enhancing energy transfer between the transmission lines.”).
Claim(s) 2 and 17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lin in view of Faiz in further view of Knierim et al. US 2013/0022133 (Previously Cited; Hereinafter Knierim).
Regarding claim 2, the combination of Lin and Faiz teaches the broadband balun structure as claimed in claim 1, but not specifically wherein the second transmission line also connects to a termination component.
However, Knierim does teach wherein the second transmission line also connects to a termination component (Figs. 3, 4; termination resistor, 60).
It would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the combination of Lin and Faiz by implementing the teachings of Knierim regarding wherein the second transmission line also connects to a termination component; in order to “maintain an overall flat response without the additional noise or dynamic range penalties of active cable compensation circuits” (See Knierim; Abstract).
Regarding claim 17, Lin teaches a system (Figs. 1-3C), comprising:
at least one balun structure (Figs. 1-3C; wideband balun) comprising:
a single-ended port (Figs. 1-3C; Port 1);
a balanced port having first and second sides (Figs. 1-3C; Port 2);
a first transmission line (Figs. 1-3C; first transmission line, TL1) connected between the single-ended port (Figs. 1-3C; Port 1) and the first side of the balanced port (Figs. 1-3C; Port 2); and
a second transmission line (Figs. 1-3C; second transmission line, TL2) connected to the second side of the balanced port (Figs. 1-3C; Port 2),
the first transmission line (Figs. 1-3C; first transmission line, TL1) positioned to couple a first portion of the first transmission line (Figs. 1-3C; first transmission line, TL1) simultaneously to both a second portion of the first transmission line (Figs. 1-3C; first transmission line, TL1) and a portion of the second transmission line (Figs. 1-3C; second transmission line, TL2).
Lin does not specifically teach electromagnetic coupling.
However, Faiz does teach electromagnetic coupling (Figs. 1A, 1B, 2A, 2B, 4A, 4B; [0007, 0048, 0091, 0092]; Claim 19; From [0048]: “Furthermore, tightly spacing the transmission line TLa and the transmission line TLb can provide electromagnetic coupling of both magnetic and electric fields, thereby providing further enhancing energy transfer between the transmission lines.”).
It would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the wideband balun of Lin by implementing the teachings of Faiz regarding electromagnetic coupling; for the purpose of “allowing tighter spacing and higher coupling between the transmission lines relative to what is achievable if both transmission lines were continuous” (See Faiz; Abstract).
The combination of Lin and Faiz does not specifically teach a test and measurement system, comprising: a test and measurement instrument.
However, Knierim does teach a test and measurement system, comprising: a test and measurement instrument (Fig. 2; [0019]).
It would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the combination of Lin and Faiz by implementing the teachings of Knierim regarding a test and measurement system, comprising: a test and measurement instrument; in order to “maintain an overall flat response without the additional noise or dynamic range penalties of active cable compensation circuits” (See Knierim; Abstract).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 18 and 19 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
The following is an examiner’s statement of reasons for allowance:
Regarding claim 18, the prior art does not teach or suggest, in combination with the rest of the limitations of claims 17,
“…further comprising a probe connected to the test and measurement instrument by a cable, wherein the at least one balun structure comprises one balun structure having the balanced port connected to the probe and the single-ended port connected to the cable.”
Regarding claim 19, the prior art does not teach or suggest, in combination with the rest of the limitations of claims 17,
“…the test and measurement instrument further comprising an input amplifier, and the at least one balun structure comprises one balun structure having the singled-ended port connected to an input connector and a balanced port connected to the input amplifier.”
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.
Floyd et al. US 2006/0220760 - An ultra-broadband balun is provided. The balun comprises: a first unbalanced transmission line comprising a first ground trace and a signal trace; and a balanced transmission line comprising a first and second signal trace, wherein the first signal trace of the balanced transmission line is connected to the first ground trace of the first unbalanced transmission line and the second signal trace of the balanced transmission line is connected to the signal trace of the first unbalanced transmission line, wherein a first capacitor is disposed in series with one of the first ground trace of the first unbalanced transmission line and the first signal trace of the balanced transmission line.
Tabatchnick et al. US 2006/0001502 - A miniaturized planar microstrip balun includes first and second microstrip coupling segments that are considerably shorter than a quarter of a guide wavelength. In at least one embodiment, a microstrip balun is provided that does not require the use of lumped circuit elements or short circuit terminations.
De Flaviis US 2004/0119555 - A balancing/unbalancing (balun) structure for operating at frequency f.sub.1 includes a microstrip printed circuit board (PCB). A balun on the PCB includes two input ports are coupled to a differential signal. An isolated port is connected to ground through a matched resistance. An output port is coupled to a single-ended signal corresponding to the differential signal. A plurality of traces on the PCB connect the two input ports, the load connection port and a tap point to the output port.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to RAUL J RIOS RUSSO whose telephone number is (571)270-3459. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday: 10am-6pm, EST.
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, Huy Phan can be reached at 571-272-7924. 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.
/RAUL J RIOS RUSSO/Examiner, Art Unit 2858
Prosecution Insights