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 .
Status of the Claims
Claims 1-19 set forth in the amendment submitted 6/30/2026 form the basis of the present examination.
Response to Arguments
The objection to the drawing, set forth to the Non-Final Office action mailed on 4/10/2026 has been withdrawn because of the amendment to the claim filed on 6/30/2026.
Applicant’s arguments, see remarks page 1, filed 6/30/2026, with respect to the rejection(s) of Claims 1-8 and 15-19 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 have been fully considered as follows:
Applicant’s Argument:
Applicant argues on page 1, of the remarks, filed on 6/30/2026, regarding the rejection(s) of Claims 1-8 and 15-19 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, that “Claims 1-8 and 15-19 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 112(b). Office Action, p. 3, item 4. Applicant amends the claims to clarify them. According, Applicant respectfully requests the Examiner to withdraw the rejection and reconsider the claims in view of the amendments.”
Examiner Response:
Applicant’s arguments, see remarks page 1 (stated above), filed 6/30/2026, with respect to the rejection(s) of Claims 1-8 and 15-19 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, as applied to the Non-Final office Action mailed on 4/10/2026 have been fully considered and is partially persuasive. The amendment to independent claim 1 makes the limitation, “each split ring of the one or more split rings includes one or more splits” clear. Applicant also deleted the not clear limitation, “L-ground conductor” and “S-ground conductor”. Therefore the rejection of independent claim 1 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, as applied to the Non-Final office Action mailed on 4/10/2026 has been withdrawn. Similarly the rejection of dependent claims 2-8 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, as applied to the Non-Final office Action mailed on 4/10/2026 has been withdrawn because of the same reason. Therefore claims 1-8 are allowed. The reason for allowable subject matter is explained after the rejection, as set forth below.
However the rejection of claims 15-19 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, as applied to the Non-Final office Action mailed on 4/10/2026 has been maintained. Because claim 15 still has insufficient structure for performing the recited method. Amended Claim 15 only includes a first resonator and a second resonator of the dual resonator device. Therefore, the claim does not appear to recite the requisite structure for performing the claimed function. Therefore, the rejection of claims 15-19 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, as applied to the Non-Final office Action mailed on 4/10/2026 has been maintained. See the rejection set forth below.
Applicant’s arguments, see remarks page 1-5, filed 6/30/2026, with respect to the rejection(s) of Claim(s) 9-14 under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tadachi in the US Patent Number US 4654606 A in view of KOSAKA et al. (Hereinafter, “Kosaka”) in the US patent Application Publication Number US 20210167505 A1 have been fully considered as follows:
Applicant’s Argument:
Applicant argues on page 2-4, of the remarks, filed on 6/30/2026, regarding the rejection(s) of Claim(s) 9-14 under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tadachi in the US Patent Number US 4654606 A in view of KOSAKA et al. (Hereinafter, “Kosaka”) in the US patent Application Publication Number US 20210167505 A1, that “Tadachi allegedly discloses a single ground conductor (element 8) on the reverse side of substrate 1. Tadachi's entire device allegedly contains only one ground conductor. There is allegedly no second ground conductor anywhere in the disclosure, and certainly no ground conductor on the first surface positioned above and overlapping a second resonator.
Furthermore, Tadachi's claim 2 explicitly states that the ground conductor is "shaped so as not to overlap the reverse side portion corresponding to the location of the dielectric resonator." This language demonstrates that Tadachi deliberately avoids placing any conductive material in a position overlapping its second resonator (dielectric resonator 6). The claimed structure requires precisely the opposite configuration-a dedicated ground conductor that substantially overlaps with the second resonator.
Not only does Tadachi fail to disclose a second ground conductor overlapping the second resonator, Tadachi affirmatively teaches away from such a configuration. Tadachi's ground conductor is specifically "shaped so as not to overlap the reverse side portion corresponding to the location of the dielectric resonator" (claim 2). This deliberate design choice preserves the Q factor of the dielectric resonator by keeping conductive material away from the resonator location (Remarks-Page 2).
…………...
The Office Action asserts that Kosaka teaches "a second ground conductor on the first surface of the planar dielectric substrate electrically connects with a ground pattern (Paragraph [0073])." Applicant respectfully submits that this characterization misrepresents Kosaka's actual disclosure. Paragraph [0073] of Kosaka describes ground terminal 14 as "an exposed pattern which is formed by partially removing a coat of the split-ring resonator 11" that is "formed of a metal plate." This ground terminal 14 is an integral component of the split-ring resonator itself-it is not a separate, dedicated ground conductor positioned on an opposite surface of a substrate that substantially overlaps with a second resonator.
Kosaka's ground terminal 14 is connected to a ground pattern (101g') on the board, but this board-level ground pattern connection does not constitute "a second ground conductor on the first surface of the planar dielectric substrate above the second resonator, wherein the second ground conductor substantially overlaps with the second resonator" as required by amended claim 9. Kosaka does not disclose a dual-resonator configuration with ground conductors on opposite surfaces of a planar dielectric substrate, each overlapping a respective resonator (Remarks-Page 3).
…………….
The claimed structure requires a specific spatial relationship: a first ground conductor beneath the first resonator on the second surface, and a second ground conductor above the second resonator on the first surface, with each ground conductor substantially overlapping its respective resonator. This symmetrical ground conductor arrangement on opposite surfaces is not taught, suggested, or rendered obvious by any combination of Tadachi and Kosaka.
For the foregoing reasons, amended claim 9 is patentable over Tadachi in view of Kosaka. Neither reference, alone or in combination, discloses or renders obvious "a second ground conductor on the first surface of the planar dielectric substrate above the second resonator, wherein the second ground conductor substantially overlaps with the second resonator." Moreover, Tadachi affirmatively teaches away from the claimed configuration by expressly designing its ground conductor to avoid overlapping its second resonator. Applicant respectfully requests withdrawal of the §103 rejection of claim 9. "If an independent claim is nonobvious under 35 U.S.C. 103, then any claim depending therefrom is nonobvious." M.P.E.P. § 2143.03.
Accordingly, Applicant respectfully requests reconsideration of pending claims in view of the amendments (Remarks-Page 4).”
Examiner Response:
Applicant’s arguments, see remarks page 2-4 (stated above), filed 6/30/2026, with respect to the rejection(s) of Claim(s) 9-14 under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tadachi in the US Patent Number US 4654606 A in view of KOSAKA et al. (Hereinafter, “Kosaka”) in the US patent Application Publication Number US 20210167505 A1, as applied to the Non-Final Office Action mailed on 4/10/2026 have been fully considered and is not persuasive. Applicant argues that “Tadachi's claim 2 explicitly states that the ground conductor is "shaped so as not to overlap the reverse side portion corresponding to the location of the dielectric resonator." This language demonstrates that Tadachi deliberately avoids placing any conductive material in a position overlapping its second resonator (dielectric resonator 6). The claimed structure requires precisely the opposite configuration-a dedicated ground conductor that substantially overlaps with the second resonator.” Which is not persuasive. Because Tadachi in the prior art in Figure 4Bmentioned that “A ground conductor 2 is provided on the back of a dielectric substrate 1 and on the surface there are provided microstrip lines 3, 4 and 5, a dielectric resonator 6 and a transistor 7. Therefore, besides the coupling between the dielectric resonator 6 and the mating microstrip line 3, undesirable coupling arises in connection with the other microstrip lines 4 and 5. Thus, there existed the problem that the coupling of the essential microstrip line 3 is disturbed. Further, because the ground conductor 2 is provided on the back side of the dielectric resonator 6 having a large Q (quality factor) in close relation thereto, there were the problems that the value Q becomes reduced so that the coupling of the microstrip line 3 is weakened, and the variation of the value Q resulting from temperature variation becomes large.” However, in Figure 1: Modified combination of Tadachi and Kosaka shows that the second ground conductor is placed on top of the resonator. Therefore, this is not same structure as Figure 4(B) of Tadachi which has the problem of large Q as explained above. And also there is no coupling relation problem between the resonator and dielectric resonator. Therefore, applicant’s argument that Not only does Tadachi fail to disclose a second ground conductor overlapping the second resonator, Tadachi affirmatively teaches away from such a configuration.is not persuasive as explained above.
Applicant’s argument, “This deliberate design choice preserves the Q factor of the dielectric resonator by keeping conductive material away from the resonator location” is not persuasive. Because Figure 1 of Tadachi shows that resonator 5 is above the dielectric resonator 6. Because resonator can also be a conductive material because an electrical circuit composed of discrete components can act as a resonator. Therefore, applicant’s argument is not persuasive. Modified Figure 1 below shows that the second ground conductor is placed above the first resonator and not above the dielectric resonator and this structure is different than the structure Tadachi explained in the prior art in Figure 4(B)
Applicant’s argument, “Kosaka's ground terminal 14 is connected to a ground pattern (101g') on the board, but this board-level ground pattern connection does not constitute "a second ground conductor on the first surface of the planar dielectric substrate above the second resonator” is not persuasive. Because Kosaka is introduced only to show that aground conductor on the first surface of a dielectric substrate. Tadachi discloses all the limitations of independent claim 9 and however Tadachi does not disclose a second ground conductor. Therefore, to modify Tadachi by adding a ground conductor on top of the resonator as Kosaka discloses a ground conductor is placed in a first side of the substrate. Because claim recites, “a second ground conductor on the first surface of the planar dielectric substrate”. Claim does not recite any connection, or any structure of the ground conductor and Kosaka discloses a aground conductor placed on the first surface. Therefore, applicant’s argument is not persuasive. Claim 9 still can be rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tadachi in the US Patent Number US 4654606 A in view of KOSAKA et al. (Hereinafter, “Kosaka”) in the US patent Application Publication Number US 20210167505 A1. However, applicant has amended the claim and added the limitation, “
Tadachi and KOSAKA is reapplied to meet at least the amended limitation of claim 9. Therefore claims 9-14 are now rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tadachi in the US Patent Number US 4654606 A in view of KOSAKA et al. (Hereinafter, “Kosaka”) in the US patent Application Publication Number US 20210167505 A1, as set forth below. See the rejection set forth below.
For expedite prosecution Applicant is invited to call to discuss the present rejection also if any further clarification needed and to discuss any possible amendment to overcome the references to make the claims allowable.
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 15-19 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.
It appears that claims 15-19 should have been rejected under 35 USC 112(b).
Referring to claim 15, it appears that the claim has recited insufficient structure for performing the recited method of having "two states," namely, "applying a wideband signal and detecting a metal". Paragraphs 34-39 of the specification teach that the method of metal detection using a dual resonator, however, claim 15 only includes a first resonator and a second resonator. Consequently, the claim does not appear to recite the requisite structure for performing the claimed function. As such, the boundaries of the language are unclear because the claim does not provide a discernable boundary on what performs the method. The recited method does not follow from the structure recited in the claim, i.e., first resonator and the second resonator, so it is unclear whether the method requires some other structure or is simply a result of operating the resonator. Thus, one of ordinary skill would not be able to draw a clear boundary between what is and is not covered by the claim. See MPEP 2173.05(g).
Claims 16-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite by virtue of its dependence from claim 15.
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(s) 9-14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tadachi in the US Patent Number US 4654606 A in view of KOSAKA et al. (Hereinafter, “Kosaka”) in the US patent Application Publication Number US 20210167505 A1.
Regarding claim 9, Tadachi teaches an apparatus of a dual resonator sensor (a microwave resonance circuit device of the type wherein a dielectric resonator is coupled only to a desired microstrip line; Column 1 Line 9-12) comprising:
a planar dielectric substrate [1] to provide electrical insulation (In FIGS. 1 and 2, 1 indicates a dielectric substrate; Column 2 Line 9);
a first resonator [4] (microstrip lines 4 as the resonator because microstrip line and microstrip resonator are often use interchangeability and microstrip resonator is special types of microstrip lines) and are on a first surface of the planar dielectric substrate [1] (In FIGS. 1 and 2, 1 indicates a dielectric substrate, 3, 4 and 5 indicate microstrip lines; Column 2 Line 9-10);
a first ground conductor [8] on a second surface of the planar dielectric substrate [1] beneath the first resonator (In FIG. 1, the dielectric resonator 6 is mounted on the reverse side of the substrate from the microstrip line 3. In order to maintain the coupling between the dielectric resonator 6 and the microstrip line 3, on the reverse side from the microstrip line 3 there is also provided the ground conductor 8, as shown in the drawing; Column 2 Line 13-18; Figure 2(B): Modified Figure 2(B) of Tadachi below shows a first ground conductor [8] on a second surface of the planar dielectric substrate [1] beneath the first resonator),
wherein the first ground conductor [8] substantially overlaps with the first resonator [4/5] (Further, the other microstrip lines 4 and 5 are also provided on the first-mentioned side, and the ground conductor 8 extends so as to overlap the back of the microstrip lines 4 and 5; Column 2 Line 21-24; Figure 2(B): Modified Figure 2(B) of Tadachi below shows the first ground conductor [8] substantially overlaps with the first resonator [4/5]);
a second resonator [6] (dielectric resonator as the second resonator) on the second surface of the planar dielectric substrate [1] (In FIG. 1, the dielectric resonator 6 is mounted on the reverse side of the substrate from the microstrip line 3; Column 2 Line 13-15),
wherein the second resonator [6] is configured to receive electromagnetic energy from the first resonator [4] (FIGS. 2(A) and (B) are a plane view and a side view corresponding to the perspective view of FIG. 1. In these drawings, the dielectric resonator 6 is, as described hereinabove, provided on the reverse side of the dielectric substrate 1 from where the microstrip lines 3, 4 and 5 are provided, and is coupled to the microstrip line 3; Column 2 Line 31-37).
PNG
media_image1.png
303
768
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Figure 2(B): Modified Figure 2(B) of Tadachi
Tadachi fails to teach a second ground conductor on the first surface of the planar dielectric substrate above the second resonator, wherein the second ground conductor substantially overlaps with the second resonator.
Kosaka teaches a split-ring resonator, a board and a connector (Paragraph [0001] Line 1), wherein
PNG
media_image2.png
329
680
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Figure 5: Modified Figure 5 of Kosaka
a second ground conductor [14] in Figure 6 on the first surface of the planar dielectric substrate [15’] (For example, as shown in FIG. 6, the split-ring 12, the ground terminal 14 and the feeding terminal 13 are provided on one of surfaces of the printed circuit board 15′) above the second resonator (Figure 1: Modified combination of Tadachi and Kosaka below shows a second ground conductor [14] on the first surface of the planar dielectric substrate [15’]/[1] above the second resonator [6]),
wherein the second ground conductor substantially overlaps with the second resonator (For example, the board 101 may comprise a ground pattern 101g having a rectangular outline. For example, the board 101 may comprise a reception terminal 101r. For example, the reception terminal 101r may be a terminal configured to be connected to a ground terminal, which is separated from a ground pattern, of a split-ring resonator according to an aspect of the present disclosure. For example, as shown in FIG. 7, the board 101 may comprise an opening 101a which corresponds to a shape and a size of a split-ring resonator according to an aspect of the present disclosure. In this case, for example, as shown in FIG. 7; Paragraph [0080] Line 1-8; Figure 1: Modified combination of Tadachi and Kosaka below shows the second ground conductor substantially overlaps with the second resonator). The purpose of doing so is to electrically connectable with a ground pattern, to provide a compact antenna used in a wireless communication device.
PNG
media_image3.png
212
425
media_image3.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image4.png
205
670
media_image4.png
Greyscale
Figure 1: Modified combination of Tadachi and Kosaka
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify Tadachi in view of Kosaka, because Kosaka teaches to include a second ground conductor on the first surface of the planar dielectric substrate electrically connects with a ground pattern (Paragraph [0073]), provides a compact antenna used in a wireless communication device (Paragraph [0002]).
Regarding claim 10, Tadachi fails to teach an apparatus, wherein the first resonator is a microstrip T-resonator or a microstrip L-resonator, wherein the microstrip T-resonator or the microstrip L-resonator includes: a transmission line; and an open-ended stub substantially perpendicular to the transmission line, wherein the open-ended stub is connected to a middle or an end of the transmission line, and wherein an open end of the open-ended stub is to feed the second resonator.
Kosaka teaches a split-ring resonator, a board and a connector (Paragraph [0001] Line 1),
wherein the first resonator is a microstrip T-resonator or a microstrip L-resonator (Figure 33) (Moreover, for example, as shown in the lower right of FIG. 33, the split-ring resonator 61 may comprise L-like shaped radiation conductors 17 as radiation conductors, the radiation conductor 17 extending in the separation direction to an end and then extending from the end in a direction intersecting with the separation direction along a plane in which the split-ring resonator 61 extends; Paragraph [0155] Line 9-16),
wherein the microstrip T-resonator or the microstrip L- resonator includes:
a transmission line [16] in Figure 33; and
an open-ended stub [12g] substantially perpendicular to the transmission line [16] (Figure 33 shows an open-ended stub [12g] substantially perpendicular to the transmission line [16]),
wherein the open-ended stub [12g] is connected to a middle or an end of the transmission line [16], and wherein an open end of the open-ended stub [12g] is to feed the second resonator (Figure 33 shows the open-ended stub [12g] is connected to a middle or an end of the transmission line [16], and wherein an open end of the open-ended stub is to feed the second resonator). The purpose of doing so is to provide a compact antenna used in a wireless communication device and to provide improved radiation property.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify Tadachi in view of Kosaka, because Kosaka teaches to include a microstrip T-resonator or a microstrip L-resonator electrically connects with a ground pattern (Paragraph [0073]), provides a compact antenna used in a wireless communication device (Paragraph [0002]) and provide improved radiation property (Paragraph [0155]).
Regarding claim 11, Tadachi fails to teach an apparatus, wherein the second resonator is a split-ring resonator comprising: one or more split rings; wherein each split ring comprises a conductive trace forming a substantially closed loop having at least one discontinuity defining a split in the conductive trace, and wherein each split ring of the one or more split rings has one of: polygonal shape; circular shape; or any combination thereof.
Kosaka teaches a split-ring resonator, a board and a connector (Paragraph [0001] Line 1), wherein
the resonator is a split-ring resonator [11] comprising: one or more split rings; wherein each split ring comprises a conductive trace forming a substantially closed loop having at least one discontinuity defining a split [12g] in the conductive trace (FIGS. 1, 2 and 3 are figures showing examples of the split-ring resonator 11 according to an aspect of the present disclosure; Paragraph [0070] Line 1-3), and
wherein each split ring of the one or more split rings has one of: polygonal shape; circular shape; or any combination thereof (For example, a center of a ring of the split-ring resonator 11 will be referred to as a point C; Paragraph [0071] Line 1-3; For example, the split-ring resonator 11 may comprise a split-ring 12. For example, the split-ring 12 may be shaped into a C-like shape extending along a rectangular ring, the C-like shape being formed of: a split portion 12g; Paragraph [0072] Line 1-4; Figure 1, 2, 3 shows split ring resonator has polygonal shape as it has rectangular shape). The purpose of doing so is to electrically connectable with a ground pattern, to provide a compact antenna used in a wireless communication device.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the resonator of Tadachi by the resonator disclosed by Kosaka, because Kosaka teaches to include a split-ring resonator includes polygonal shape; circular shape; or any combination thereof electrically connects with a ground pattern (Paragraph [0073]), provides a compact antenna used in a wireless communication device (Paragraph [0002]).
Regarding claim 12, Tadachi fails to teach an apparatus, wherein the first resonator and the second resonator are configured to resonate at a same frequency.
Kosaka teaches a split-ring resonator, a board and a connector (Paragraph [0001] Line 1),
wherein the first resonator and the second resonator are configured to resonate at a same frequency (For example, as shown in FIG. 4, the split-ring resonator 11 may comprise the split-ring 12, the ground terminal 14 and a feeding terminal 13. For example, the feeding terminal 13 may be formed of a wire and a metal plate. For example, the feeding terminal 13 may be a terminal for supplying radio frequency (RF) signals to the split-ring 12; Paragraph [0075] Line 1-7; Same frequency is applied to everywhere on the substrate surface and therefore the first resonator and the second resonator are configured to resonate at a same frequency). The purpose of doing so is to electrically connectable with a ground pattern, to provide a compact antenna used in a wireless communication device.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the resonator of Tadachi by the resonator disclosed by Kosaka, because Kosaka teaches to resonate the first resonator and the second resonator at a same frequency provides a compact antenna used in a wireless communication device (Paragraph [0002]).
Regarding claim 13, Tadachi teaches an apparatus,
wherein the planar dielectric substrate [1] constitutes one or more dielectric materials (In FIGS. 1 and 2, 1 indicates a dielectric substrate; Column 2 Line 9).
.
Regarding claim 14, Tadachi in view of Kosaka teaches an apparatus,
wherein one or more surfaces of the first ground conductor substantially overlap with one or more surfaces of the second ground conductor (In FIG. 1, the dielectric resonator 6 is mounted on the reverse side of the substrate from the microstrip line 3. In order to maintain the coupling between the dielectric resonator 6 and the microstrip line 3, on the reverse side from the microstrip line 3 there is also provided the ground conductor 8, as shown in the drawing; Column 2 Line 13-18; Tadachi discloses first ground conductor which covers the entire reverse side of the dielectric substrate and in combination of Kosaka discloses the second conductor in the first side of the dielectric substrate and therefore one or more surfaces of the first ground conductor substantially overlap with one or more surfaces of the second ground conductor).
Allowable Subject Matter
11. Claims 1-8 are allowed.
12. The following is an examiner’s statement of reasons for allowance:
Claims 1-8 are allowed as set forth below.
Regarding claim 1, the prior art of record as considered and understood by the examiner fails to teach or fairly suggest:
a microstrip L-resonator on a first surface of the planar dielectric substrate, wherein the microstrip L-resonator includes:
a transmission line; and
an open-ended stub substantially perpendicular to the transmission line,
wherein the open-ended stub is connected to one end of the transmission line;
a first ground conductor on a second surface of the planar dielectric substrate beneath the microstrip L-resonator, wherein the first ground conductor substantially overlaps with the microstrip L-resonator;
a split-ring resonator on the second surface of the planar dielectric substrate,
wherein the split-ring resonator includes is configured to receive electromagnetic energy from the microstrip L-resonator, wherein the split-ring resonator includes:
one or more split rings, wherein each split ring of the comprises a conductive trace forming a substantially closed loop having at least one or more discontinuity defining a split in the conductive trace;
a second ground conductor on the first surface of the planar dielectric substrate above the split-ring resonator,
wherein the second ground conductor substantially overlaps with the split-ring resonator; and
a rectifying block connected to a vertex of microstrip L-resonator, wherein the rectifying block is configured to rectify AC signals received from the microstrip L-resonator into DC output signals.
Tadachi (US 4654606 A) and KOSAKA et al. (US 20210167505 A1) are regarded as the closest prior art to the invention of claim 1. Tadachi discloses, “a microwave resonance circuit device of the type wherein a dielectric resonator is coupled only to a desired microstrip line (Column 1 Line 9-12). In FIGS. 1 and 2, 1 indicates a dielectric substrate (Column 2 Line 9). In FIGS. 1 and 2, 1 indicates a dielectric substrate, 3, 4 and 5 indicate microstrip lines (Column 2 Line 9-10). In FIG. 1, the dielectric resonator 6 is mounted on the reverse side of the substrate from the microstrip line 3. In order to maintain the coupling between the dielectric resonator 6 and the microstrip line 3, on the reverse side from the microstrip line 3 there is also provided the ground conductor 8, as shown in the drawing (Column 2 Line 13-18). Further, the other microstrip lines 4 and 5 are also provided on the first-mentioned side, and the ground conductor 8 extends so as to overlap the back of the microstrip lines 4 and 5 (Column 2 Line 21-24). In FIG. 1, the dielectric resonator 6 is mounted on the reverse side of the substrate from the microstrip line 3 (Column 2 Line 13-15). FIGS. 2(A) and (B) are a plane view and a side view corresponding to the perspective view of FIG. 1. In these drawings, the dielectric resonator 6 is, as described hereinabove, provided on the reverse side of the dielectric substrate 1 from where the microstrip lines 3, 4 and 5 are provided, and is coupled to the microstrip line 3 (Column 2 Line 31-37).” However, Tadachi fails to teach an open-ended stub substantially perpendicular to the transmission line, wherein the open-ended stub is connected to one end of the transmission line; a first ground conductor on a second surface of the planar dielectric substrate beneath the microstrip L-resonator, wherein the first ground conductor substantially overlaps with the microstrip L-resonator; ….. wherein the split-ring resonator includes is configured to receive electromagnetic energy from the microstrip L-resonator, wherein the split-ring resonator includes: one or more split rings, wherein each split ring of the comprises a conductive trace forming a substantially closed loop having at least one or more discontinuity defining a split in the conductive trace; a second ground conductor on the first surface of the planar dielectric substrate above the split-ring resonator, wherein the second ground conductor substantially overlaps with the split-ring resonator; and a rectifying block connected to a vertex of microstrip L-resonator, wherein the rectifying block is configured to rectify AC signals received from the microstrip L-resonator into DC output signals. Kosaka teaches, “a split-ring resonator, a board and a connector (Paragraph [0001] Line 1). For example, the board 101 may comprise a ground pattern 101g having a rectangular outline. For example, the board 101 may comprise a reception terminal 101r. For example, the reception terminal 101r may be a terminal configured to be connected to a ground terminal, which is separated from a ground pattern, of a split-ring resonator according to an aspect of the present disclosure. For example, as shown in FIG. 7, the board 101 may comprise an opening 101a which corresponds to a shape and a size of a split-ring resonator according to an aspect of the present disclosure. In this case, for example, as shown in FIG. 7 (Paragraph [0080] Line 1-8).” However Kosaka does not disclose an open-ended stub substantially perpendicular to the transmission line, wherein the open-ended stub is connected to one end of the transmission line; a first ground conductor on a second surface of the planar dielectric substrate beneath the microstrip L-resonator, wherein the first ground conductor substantially overlaps with the microstrip L-resonator; ….. wherein the split-ring resonator includes is configured to receive electromagnetic energy from the microstrip L-resonator, wherein the split-ring resonator includes: one or more split rings, wherein each split ring of the comprises a conductive trace forming a substantially closed loop having at least one or more discontinuity defining a split in the conductive trace; ….and a rectifying block connected to a vertex of microstrip L-resonator, wherein the rectifying block is configured to rectify AC signals received from the microstrip L-resonator into DC output signals. Therefore, the invention of Tadachi and KOSAKA, even if modified, do not alone or in combination with the other art of record, teach or fairly suggest, “a microstrip L-resonator on a first surface of the planar dielectric substrate, wherein the microstrip L-resonator includes: a transmission line; and an open-ended stub substantially perpendicular to the transmission line, wherein the open-ended stub is connected to one end of the transmission line; a first ground conductor on a second surface of the planar dielectric substrate beneath the microstrip L-resonator, wherein the first ground conductor substantially overlaps with the microstrip L-resonator; a split-ring resonator on the second surface of the planar dielectric substrate, wherein the split-ring resonator includes is configured to receive electromagnetic energy from the microstrip L-resonator, wherein the split-ring resonator includes: one or more split rings, wherein each split ring of the comprises a conductive trace forming a substantially closed loop having at least one or more discontinuity defining a split in the conductive trace; a second ground conductor on the first surface of the planar dielectric substrate above the split-ring resonator, wherein the second ground conductor substantially overlaps with the split-ring resonator; and a rectifying block connected to a vertex of microstrip L-resonator, wherein the rectifying block is configured to rectify AC signals received from the microstrip L-resonator into DC output signals.” and also in combination with all other elements in claim 1 distinguish the present invention from the prior art references.
Claims 2-8 are allowed by virtue of their dependence from claim 1.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure:
Blumberg (US 20150033823 A1) discloses, “System, Method, And Apparatus For Bubble Detection In A Fluid Line Using A Split-Ring Resonator- [Abstract] A system, method, and apparatus for detecting at least one condition of interest relating to a tube, e.g. the presence of an air bubble. In some embodiments, the sensor includes antennas, a split-ring resonator, a frequency generator capable of generating frequencies in the microwave range, and a detection component. [0116] The system 58 shown in FIG. 4 includes a split-ring resonator component 59 operatively coupled to a fluid line 60 (e.g., an intravenous fluid line) and a bubble detection component 62. The split-ring resonator component 59 and the bubble detection component 62 are operatively coupled together. [0117] The split-ring resonator component 59 includes at least one split-ring resonator (often abbreviated herein as "SRR"). The split-ring resonator component 59 may also include a transmitting antenna configured to transmit energy (e.g., electromagnetic energy, such as microwave energy) into the at least one SRR and a receiving antenna configured to receive the energy from the transmitting antenna and/or the one or more SRRs. The split-ring resonator component 59 may be arranged such that the one or more SRRs cause a tunneling effect or increased frequency selective coupling to occur between the antennas. [0118] The one or more SRRs of the split-ring resonator component 59 each have at least one gap that is affected by properties of the surrounding materials. Properties of the surrounding material may cause the behavior of the SRR within the split-ring resonator component 59 to change. For example, surrounding materials of differing dielectric properties will alter the behavior of the SRR. The resonant frequency of the SRR within the split-ring resonator component 59, for example, will change as a function of the dielectric properties of the surrounding material. The split-ring resonator component 59 and bubble detector component 62 may be used in any system where a dielectric change may correlate to a condition of interest beyond only in the detection of bubbles. [0119] Referring specifically to FIG. 4, the bubble 61 has different dielectric properties than the surrounding fluid in the fluid line 60. Differences in the dielectric properties of the bubble 61 as compared to the fluid affects the one or more SRRs within the split-ring resonator component 59 by, for example, altering the capacitance of the one or more SRRs and therefore shifting the resonant frequency of the one or more SRRs when the bubble 61 is located near the split-ring resonator component 59-However Blumberg does not disclose a microstrip L-resonator on a first surface of the planar dielectric substrate, wherein the microstrip L-resonator includes: a transmission line; and an open-ended stub substantially perpendicular to the transmission line, wherein the open-ended stub is connected to one end of the transmission line; a first ground conductor on a second surface of the planar dielectric substrate beneath the microstrip L-resonator, wherein the first ground conductor substantially overlaps with the microstrip L-resonator; a split-ring resonator on the second surface of the planar dielectric substrate, wherein the split-ring resonator includes is configured to receive electromagnetic energy from the microstrip L-resonator, wherein the split-ring resonator includes: one or more split rings, wherein each split ring of the comprises a conductive trace forming a substantially closed loop having at least one or more discontinuity defining a split in the conductive trace; a second ground conductor on the first surface of the planar dielectric substrate above the split-ring resonator, wherein the second ground conductor substantially overlaps with the split-ring resonator; and a rectifying block connected to a vertex of microstrip L-resonator, wherein the rectifying block is configured to rectify AC signals received from the microstrip L-resonator into DC output signals.”
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.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to NASIMA MONSUR whose telephone number is (571)272-8497. The examiner can normally be reached 10:00 am-6:00 pm.
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, Eman Alkafawi can be reached at (571) 272-4448. 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.
/NASIMA MONSUR/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2858
Prosecution Insights