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 .
Claim Objections
The claims are objected to because they include reference characters which are enclosed in both brackets and parentheses.
Reference characters corresponding to elements recited in the detailed description of the drawings and used in conjunction with the recitation of the same element or group of elements in the claims should be enclosed within parentheses so as to avoid confusion with other numbers or characters which may appear in the claims. See MPEP § 608.01(m).
Claims 1-2 are objected to because of the following informalities:
Claim 1 states “wherein, in respect of each dipole element [(14)] in the array: a) the first end [(14.1)] is connected by first and second electrical connections [(24, 26)] to the first end of each of only two adjacent dipole elements [(16, 18)] respectively in the array and b) the second end [(14.2)] is connected by third and fourth electrical connections [(28, 30)] to the second end of each of only the two adjacent dipole elements [(16,18)] respectively”. The reference characters in this section confuses things since it is only referring to elements in respect of dipole element 14, instead of each dipole element in the array. The applicant should either refer to the elements in respect of each dipole element in the array, or delete the reference characters which the examiner suggests.
Claim 2 ends with “to the second end of the adjacent second and third dipole elements respective” where “respective” should be “respectively”.
Appropriate correction is required.
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 3-4 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 states “wherein, in respect of each dipole element [(14)] in the array: a) the first end [(14.1)] is connected by first and second electrical connections [(24, 26)] to the first end of each of only two adjacent dipole elements [(16, 18)] respectively in the array and b) the second end [(14.2)] is connected by third and fourth electrical connections [(28, 30)] to the second end of each of only the two adjacent dipole elements [(16,18)] respectively”. Claim 3 then recites “wherein the first end [(20.1)] of the fourth dipole element [(20)] is connected by fifth and sixth electrical connections [(36, 38)] to respectively the first ends [(18.1, 22.1)] of the third and fifth dipole elements and wherein the second end [(20.2)] of the fourth dipole element [(20)] is connected by seventh and eighth electrical connections [(40,42)] to respectively the second ends [(18.2, 22.2)] of the third and fifth dipole elements, wherein the first end [(22.1)] of the fifth dipole element [(22)] is connected to the first end [(16.1)] of the second dipole element [(16)] by a ninth electrical connection [(44)] and wherein the second end [(22.2)] of the fifth dipole element [(22)] is connected to the second end [(16.2)] of the second dipole element [(16)] by a tenth electrical connection [(46)]”.
So in claim 1, it states each of the dipoles has a first to fourth electrical connections. Then in claim 3, it now is claiming fifth to tenth electrical connections. This makes it unclear since it is naming the same electrical connections of the dipoles other names. The applicant should either delete “wherein the first end [(20.1)] of the fourth dipole element [(20)] is connected by fifth and sixth electrical connections [(36, 38)] to respectively the first ends [(18.1, 22.1)] of the third and fifth dipole elements and wherein the second end [(20.2)] of the fourth dipole element [(20)] is connected by seventh and eighth electrical connections [(40,42)] to respectively the second ends [(18.2, 22.2)] of the third and fifth dipole elements, wherein the first end [(22.1)] of the fifth dipole element [(22)] is connected to the first end [(16.1)] of the second dipole element [(16)] by a ninth electrical connection [(44)] and wherein the second end [(22.2)] of the fifth dipole element [(22)] is connected to the second end [(16.2)] of the second dipole element [(16)] by a tenth electrical connection [(46)]” from claim 3, or amend claim 1 to state that “wherein, in respect of each dipole element [(14)] in the array: a) the first end [(14.1)] is connected by two electrical connections [(24, 26)] to the first end of each of only two adjacent dipole elements [(16, 18)] respectively in the array and b) the second end [(14.2)] is connected by two electrical connections [(28, 30)] to the second end of each of only the two adjacent dipole elements [(16,18)] respectively” and refer to the “the two respective electrical connections” whenever claiming the individual electrical connections in claims 2-3.
Claim 4 is dependent on claim 3, and therefore also rejected.
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.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1-2, 5, 7, and 9-12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) and (a)(2) as being anticipated by Bull (US 5300885).
Regarding claim 1, Bull teaches the following:
a direction finding antenna array (column 1, lines 7-10) comprising at least a first dipole antenna element (elements 6, 8 and 10, figure 1), a second dipole antenna element (elements 6, 20 and 22, figure 1) and a third dipole antenna element (elements 6, 28 and 30, figure 1), each comprising respective first ends (ends of elements 8, 20, and 30, figure 1), respective second ends (ends of elements 10, 22, and 28, figure 1) and a respective feed-point (element 6, figure 1), wherein the first, second and third dipole elements are arranged in spaced relationship relative to one another in a non-linear pattern (as shown in figure 1), wherein, in respect of each dipole element in the array: a) the first end (ends of elements 8, 20, and 42, figure 1) is connected by first and second electrical connections (46 and 56 for element 8; 46 and 62 for element 20; 56 and 62 for element 30) to the first end of each of only two adjacent dipole elements respectively in the array and b) the second end is connected by third and fourth electrical connections (50 and 52 for element 10; 50 and 66 for element 22; 52 and 66 for element 28) to the second end of each of only the two adjacent dipole elements respectively.
Regarding claim 2, Bull as referred in claim 1 teaches the following:
wherein the first end of the first antenna element (end of element 8, figure 1) is connected by the first (element 46, figure 1) and second (element 56, figure 1) electrical connections to the first end of adjacent second (end of element 20, figure 1) and third (end of element 30, figure 1) dipole elements respectively in the array and the second end of the first dipole element (end of element 10, figure 1) is connected by the third (element 50, figure 1) and fourth (element 52, figure 1) electrical connections to the second end of the adjacent second (end of element 22, figure 1) and third (end of element 28, figure 1) dipole elements respective.
Regarding claim 5, Bull as referred in claim 1 teaches the following:
wherein the dipole elements are linear in configuration (as shown in figure 1).
Regarding claim 7, Bull as referred in claim 1 teaches the following:
wherein each electrical connection (46, 50, 52, 56, 62, 66) comprises an elongate conductor (as shown in figure 1).
Regarding claim 9, Bull as referred in claim 1 teaches the following:
wherein the respective feed-points (portion of element 6 that feeds each dipole, figures 1 and 3-5) are located in a common plane (as shown in figure 1).
Regarding claim 10, Bull as referred in claim 1 teaches the following:
a direction finding system (column 1, lines 7-10) comprising a direction finding antenna array as claimed in claim 1 (as explained in claim 1) and wherein the respective feed points are connected to respective inputs of coherent receivers of a receiver arrangement (column 2, lines 25-28, as shown in figures 1 and 3-5).
Regarding claim 11, Bull as referred in claim 10 teaches the following:
wherein the receiver arrangement comprises at least one processor for executing a computer program comprising correlative direction-finding algorithms (column 7, lines 12-16).
Regarding claim 12, Bull teaches the following:
a direction finding antenna array (column 1, lines 7-10) comprising:
a first dipole antenna element (elements 6, 8 and 10, figure 1) comprising a first end (end of element 8, figure 1), a second end (end of element 10, figure 1) and a first feedpoint (portion of element 6 that feeds the first dipole, figures 3-5);
a second dipole antenna element (elements 6, 20 and 22, figure 1) comprising a third end (end of element 20, figure 1), a fourth end (end of element 22, figure 1) and a second feedpoint (portion of element 6 that feeds the second dipole, figures 3-5);
a third dipole antenna element (elements 6, 28 and 30, figure 1) comprising a fifth end (end of element 30, figure 1), a sixth end (end of element 28, figure 1) and a third feedpoint (portion of element 6 that feeds the third dipole, figures 3-5); and
a coherent receiver (element 94, figure 5, column 2, lines 25-28) having first, second and third inputs connected respectively to the first feedpoint, the second feedpoint and the third feedpoint (as shown in figures 1 and 3-5);
wherein the first, second and third dipole elements are arranged in spaced relationship relative to and adjacent to one another in a non-linear pattern (as shown in figure 1),
wherein the first end is respectively connected by first (element 46, figure 1) and second (element 56, figure 1) electrical connections to the third end of the second dipole antenna element and to the fifth end of the third dipole antenna element to form first loop-like elements (as shown in figure 1);
wherein the second end is respectively connected by third (element 50, figure 1) and fourth (element 52, figure 1) electrical connections to the fourth end of the second dipole antenna element and to the sixth end of the third dipole antenna element to form second loop-like elements (as shown in figure 1).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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 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 8 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bull (US 5300885) in view of Galejs (US 2017/0317415).
Regarding claim 8, Bull as referred in claim 1 teaches a direction finding antenna array with the exception of the following:
wherein each electrical connection comprises a filter network.
Galejs suggests the teachings of a direction finding antenna array (paragraph [0018] and [0033]-[0034]) wherein each electrical connection comprises a filter network (paragraph [0033]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to have electrical connection of Bull to include a filter network as suggested by the teachings of Galejs in to help alter the signals received by the antenna array so the signals can then be processed by a processor to determine the direction detection information (paragraph [0033]-[0034]).
Additional Comments
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Galejs (US 2017/0317415) and Rahamim et al. (US 7619579) also teach similar structures of Bull and could be used in place of Bull to teach the rejected limitations.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 3-4 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.
Claim 6 is 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. If claim 12 were also amended to have the limitations of claim 6, then it would also be allowable.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to AB SALAM ALKASSIM JR whose telephone number is (571)270-0449. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Thursday.
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 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.
/AB SALAM ALKASSIM JR/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2845