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 .
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 08/30/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. Regarding the 112(b) rejection of claim 1 and 6, the wording of the claim was adjusted from “the control unit is configured to transmit a radio wave” to “a control unit transmits a radio wave”. This does not overcome the previous issue that a control unit does not transmit radio waves.
Applicant’s arguments, see remarks, filed 08/30/2026, with respect to claims 4 and 6 have been fully considered and are persuasive. The 112(b) rejections of claims 4 and 6 has been withdrawn.
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1-6 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any combination of reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
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 and 6 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 and 6 recites the limitation “the control unit transmits a radio wave in different directions for each of two or more different frequencies by using beam squint of the leaky wave antenna” and “the control unit transmits a radio wave in a direction”. This feature is indefinite as a control unit cannot transmit a radio wave. The antenna is the transmission medium. The specification appears to say that the control unit controls the directivity of the radio wave (¶[0008]). For the purposes of compact prosecution, this claim is taken to read as “the control unit controls the transmission of a radio wave”.
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.
Claim 6 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chang et al. (US8253642; hereinafter Chang) in view of Karttaavi et al. (US20140239067; hereinafter Karttaavi).
Regarding independent claim 1, Chang (fig. 4-6) discloses “An antenna device comprising: a leaky wave antenna (41), a high-frequency unit (604/605), and a control unit (610), wherein the leaky wave antenna comprises an element row (row of 41s), the element row comprises a plurality of unit elements disposed in series (see fig. 4), the unit element comprises a capacitance unit and an inductance unit, and either the capacitance unit or the inductance unit is disposed in series with an adjacent other unit element (figs. 1-3 and col. 2 line 62 to col. 3 line 7; “the antenna unit 100 is equivalent to a CRLH transmission line. The metal sheet 120, the conductive pole 210 and the metal ground layer 110 are equivalent to a left-hand inductor of the CRLH transmission line, and the transmission line 130, the metal block 171 and the conductive pole 220 are equivalent to a left-hand capacitor of the CRLH transmission line”), the control unit is connected to the high-frequency unit (fig. 7, 610 connects to 640/650), the control unit controls a directivity of a radio wave, the high frequency unit comprises a high frequency output unit (end of transmission line is an output unit), the high frequency unit is connected to the leaky wave antenna (fig. 4 and col 6 lines 29-30; “The antenna units 411-416 are connected in series to extend outwards from the transmission lines 601 and 602 of the antenna unit 430 to form the first antenna series 41”)”.
Chang does not disclose “the control unit controls the transmission of a radio wave in different directions for each of two or more different frequencies by using beam squint of the leaky wave antenna”.
However, Karttaavi teaches using beam squint to control the directivity of an array antenna (¶[0120]; FIG. 7b illustrates how the angle of the antenna 310 radiation pattern shifts according to the incoming frequency of radio frequency identification signaling. The antenna 310 can be configured by varying the sub-antenna spacing, number of chains of sub-antennas, numbers of sub-antennas within the chains, electrical feed, and the like to help optimize the change in angle of the radiation pattern of the antenna 310 in response to particular frequency signaling. This can allow for electrical alteration of a radiation characteristic of the antenna to align the second sensitivity region R2 of the antenna 110 accordingly. This could provide any number of configurations depending on the number of transmitted frequencies of radio frequency identification signaling)”.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to apply the teachings of Karttaavi and make Chang’s antenna device wherein the control unit controls the transmission of a radio wave in different directions for each of two or more different frequencies by using beam squint of the leaky wave antenna, in order to electronically control the main beam direction.
Regarding claim 2, Chang discloses “The antenna device according to claim 1, wherein an angle at which a transmission range of radio waves viewed from the antenna device is 60 degrees or more, due to the beam squint of the leaky wave antenna (Table 1 shows angle at which a transmission range of radio waves of the leaky wave antenna is 70 degrees (-30 to +26))”.
Regarding claim 3, Chang discloses “The antenna device according to claim 1, wherein the leaky wave antenna is a left-handed leaky wave antenna comprising a metamaterial (col. 2 lines 64-67; “the antenna units are respectively equivalent to a composite right/left-hand (CRLH) transmission line”)”.
Regarding claim 4, Chang discloses “The antenna device according to claim 1, comprising two mutually independent power feeding units (PT31/PT32) at both ends of an element array”.
Regarding claim 5, Chang discloses “The antenna device according to claim 1,wherein the leaky wave antenna is a dual-polarization antenna comprising two element rows and corresponding to two mutually orthogonal polarizations (fig. 4, two arrays 41 and 42 are orthogonal)”.
Claim 6 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chang in view of Karttaavi, further in view of Lee et al. (US9871300; hereinafter Lee).
Regarding claim 6, Chang discloses the antenna device according to claim 1 as shown previously.
Chang does not disclose “wherein a plurality of element rows are arranged in a direction substantially perpendicular to a direction of the beam squint to form an array, and the control unit controls the transmission of a radio wave in a direction of the beam squint and in a direction substantially perpendicular to the beam squint by controlling the beam squint and the plurality of element rows”.
However, Lee teaches forming a leaky antenna array in perpendicular rows and controlling the beam directions electronically using various control signals (fig. 1B-1D and col. 2 lines 45-53; The embodiments described herein may address the above noted deficiencies by the electronic device including a phased array antenna structure that is steerable. The phased array antenna structure herein can utilize multiple leaky wave antenna (LWA) cells with tunable components and a controller to set a radiation angle of the phased array antenna. In one example, the controller can generate a control signal to electronically steer the LWA cells)”.
Furthermore, Karttaavi teaches using beam squint to control the directivity of an array antenna (¶[0120]; FIG. 7b illustrates how the angle of the antenna 310 radiation pattern shifts according to the incoming frequency of radio frequency identification signaling. The antenna 310 can be configured by varying the sub-antenna spacing, number of chains of sub-antennas, numbers of sub-antennas within the chains, electrical feed, and the like to help optimize the change in angle of the radiation pattern of the antenna 310 in response to particular frequency signaling. This can allow for electrical alteration of a radiation characteristic of the antenna to align the second sensitivity region R2 of the antenna 110 accordingly. This could provide any number of configurations depending on the number of transmitted frequencies of radio frequency identification signaling)”.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to apply the teachings of Lee and Karttaavi and make Chang’s antenna device wherein a plurality of element rows are arranged in a direction substantially perpendicular to a direction of the beam squint to form an array, and the control unit controls the transmission of a radio wave in a direction of the beam squint and in a direction substantially perpendicular to the beam squint by controlling the beam squint and the plurality of element rows, in order to give space for the beam squint to be angled.
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.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to AUSTIN MICHAEL BACK whose telephone number is (703)756-4521. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 8 AM - 5 PM ET.
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, Dimary Lopez can be reached on (571) 270-7893. 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.
/AUSTIN M BACK/Examiner, Art Unit 2845
/DIMARY S LOPEZ CRUZ/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2845
