DETAILED ACTION
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Priority
Acknowledgment is made of applicant’s claim for foreign priority under 35 U.S.C. 119 (a)-(d). Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 4/25/2024 and 10/16/2024 was is/are in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is/are being considered by the examiner.
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election without traverse of Group I, readable in claims 1-6 in the reply filed on 6/26/2026 is acknowledged.
Claims 7-13 withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected Group(s), there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Election was made without traverse in the reply filed on 6/26/2026
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 1-6 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: “a microstrip arranged in said sensor housing and at least one coaxial cable each having an inner conductor electrically connected to the microstrip”.
A broad range or limitation together with a narrow range or limitation that falls within the broad range or limitation (in the same claim) may be considered indefinite if the resulting claim does not clearly set forth the metes and bounds of the patent protection desired. See MPEP § 2173.05(c). In the present instance, claim 1 recites the broad recitation “at least one coaxial cable” which requires one or more coaxial cables, and the claim also recites “each having an inner conductor” which is the narrower statement of the range/limitation as it requires the presence of at least two coaxial cables. The claim(s) are considered indefinite because there is a question or doubt as to whether the feature introduced by such narrower language is (a) merely exemplary of the remainder of the claim, and therefore not required, or (b) a required feature of the claims.
For the purpose of examination, the examiner considers the claim as reciting:
- “a microstrip arranged in said sensor housing, and at least one coaxial cable, the at least one coaxial cable having an inner conductor electrically connected to the microstrip”.
Furthermore, the recitation “wherein the sensor housing is configured as a cavity resonator with a resonant frequency within the frequency band and as shielding for said frequency band” in claim 1, is not understood. It’s not clear how the housing is capable of resonating at a given frequency while also “shielding” the same frequency. A review of the Specification doesn’t appear to provide clarification about this. For the purpose of examination, the examiner considers the recitation:
- “wherein the sensor housing is configured as a cavity resonator with a resonant frequency within the frequency band
Correction is required.
In claim 2, line 3, the recitation “the strip line” lacks proper antecedent basis in the claim. For the purpose of examination, the examiner considers the recitation “a strip line”.
Claims 2-6 are also rejected as they inherit the deficiencies in claim 1 noted above.
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) 1-3 and 5-6 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by the US Patent US 4,303,818 by Smith, (Smith hereafter).
Regarding claim 1, Smith teaches a moisture sensor comprising an electromagnetically shielding sensor housing (including chambers 27 and 27’, shown in Figure 2), a microstrip arranged in said sensor housing (loop 36 + inner conductor 41 shown in Figure 4. The examiner notes that the instant application Specification, paragraph 0027, explains the recited microstrip can be formed as a rod made of conductive material. The end of the loop 36 and/or portion 41, is shaped as an elongated rod) and at least one coaxial cable (46 in Fig. 4), the at least one coaxial cable having an inner conductor (40) electrically connected to the microstrip and an outer conductor (46) electrically connected to the sensor housing (via portion 45),
the microstrip and the at least one coaxial cable configured to conduct microwaves with a frequency in a frequency band which covers at least a part of the microwave range of between 10 megahertz (MHz) and 300 GHz (the resonant cavity formed by chambers 27 and 27’ are designed to conduct microwaves, as explained in col. 3, lines 9-15. Microwaves are understood to include a range of frequencies between 300Mhz and 300GHz, which is within the recited range),
wherein the sensor housing is configured as a cavity resonator (see col. 3, lines 31-56) with a resonant frequency within the frequency band see claim rejection under 35 USC 112(b) above) and wherein the sensor housing has openings (55) which establish a hygric contact between its interior and an environment of the sensor housing that is sufficient for moisture equalization, and wherein moisture-storing material (air) is provided in the interior of the sensor housing.
Regarding claim 2, Smith teaches in Figure 4, the moisture sensor according to claim 1, wherein a first coaxial cable (46 connected to 33) is led into the sensor housing and is electrically connected by its inner conductor (40) to a first end of a strip line (42), and a second coaxial cable (not shown 46 connected to 33’) is led into the sensor housing and is electrically connected by its inner conductor to a second end of a strip line opposite the first end.
Regarding claim 3, Smith teaches the moisture sensor according to claim 1, wherein the sensor housing (housing including chambers 27 and 27’) is designed as a rectangular waveguide (cavity resonators 27 and 27’) and has two congruent base surfaces (lower base surface of the housing and upper top surface of the housing) which are arranged opposite one another in parallel at a distance which is smaller than the smallest dimension of the base surfaces (the distance between the bottom and top surface of the housings is smaller than the distance between one corner of the base surface and the corner of the top surface that is farthest from the one corner), wherein the base surfaces are connected via side surfaces, wherein openings for moisture equalization (55) are made in at least one base surface and wherein at least one coaxial cable is led into the sensor housing through one of the respective side surfaces (as illustrated in Figure 2).
Regarding claim 5, Smith teaches the microstrip (36+41 in Figure 4) is designed as a conductor structure comprising such single-strip line.
Regarding claim 6, Smith teaches the moisture sensor according to claim 1, wherein the material provided in the interior of the sensor housing (air within the housing) has the same or a similar moisture storage function as the material in the environment to be measured (air outside the housing).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 4 would be allowable if rewritten to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 2nd paragraph, set forth in this Office action and to include all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Regarding claim 4, the prior art of record doesn’t teach alone or in combination, the moisture sensor according to claim 1, wherein the microstrip is designed as a copper plate, in combination with all other elements recited.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure:
- The US Patent US 4,103,224 by Taro et al., directed to microwave hygrometers including cavity resonators in the manner shown in Figure 2. See figure below:
PNG
media_image1.png
538
507
media_image1.png
Greyscale
- The US Patent US 3,946,308 by Miura et al., directed to methods utilizing resonance for humidity measurement using a cavity resonator as shown in Figure 1a. See figure below:
PNG
media_image2.png
441
458
media_image2.png
Greyscale
- The US Patent US 9,562,864 by Harrison et al., directed to cavity resonators. See figure below:
PNG
media_image3.png
296
809
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Richard Isla whose telephone number is (571)272-5056. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 9a - 5:30p.
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.
/RICHARD ISLA/ Primary Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2858 July 15, 2026
Prosecution Insights