DETAILED ACTION
This action is in response to the initial filing filed on March 28, 2024 Claims 1-17 havebeen examined in this application.
Information Disclosure Statement
The Information Disclosure Statement (IDS) filed on 3/28/2024 and 6/13/2025 have been acknowledged.
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
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 Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(d):
(d) REFERENCE IN DEPENDENT FORMS.—Subject to subsection (e), a claim in dependent form shall contain a reference to a claim previously set forth and then specify a further limitation of the subject matter claimed. A claim in dependent form shall be construed to incorporate by reference all the limitations of the claim to which it refers.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, fourth paragraph:
Subject to the following paragraph [i.e., the fifth paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112], a claim in dependent form shall contain a reference to a claim previously set forth and then specify a further limitation of the subject matter claimed. A claim in dependent form shall be construed to incorporate by reference all the limitations of the claim to which it refers.
Claim 5 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(d) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, 4th paragraph, as being of improper dependent form for failing to further limit the subject matter of the claim upon which it depends, or for failing to include all the limitations of the claim upon which it depends. Claim 5 depends on claim 3 and claim 1. Claim 1 teaches the top part and side part and claim 3 teaches molded of resin. Applicant may cancel the claim(s), amend the claim(s) to place the claim(s) in proper dependent form, rewrite the claim(s) in independent form, or present a sufficient showing that the dependent claim(s) complies with the statutory requirements.
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.
Claims 1-17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Mcbain et al (WO 2020/041320 A1) in view of Kiyokazu (JP 2019/190928 A).
Regarding Claim 1, Mcbain teaches a radio wave absorber for a high-frequency communication apparatus absorbing unwanted radiated radio waves of a millimeter wave radar [0100-0101 for absorbing EMI using board level shielding]
to reduce radio wave interference with a semiconductor element inside the high-frequency communication apparatus, the radio wave absorber comprising [0099-0100 for using high frequency EMI (interferences) for absorbing and blocking interference with shielding, 0126-0127]:
a side part surrounding the semiconductor element configured to be fixed to a base part provided in the high-frequency communication apparatus [0107 for having a top lid, cover and side walls with protrusions and element 1158];
and a top part closing an open face surrounded by the side part, an inner face of the top part being provided with a plurality of protruding parts configured to protrude toward the semiconductor element positioned inside the radio wave absorber [figure 11 element 1156 and 1158],
and periodically arranged, and the protruding parts being formed to be tapered toward the semiconductor element and being integrally molded of a synthetic resin [0036 for using elastomers, with 0041-0043 for using PDMS for pyramidal pattern].
Mcbain fails to explicitly teach positioned to be spaced apart from the semiconductor element.
Kiyokazu has a radar device which improves radio wave permeability in a wide angle range (abstract) and teaches positioned to be spaced apart from the semiconductor element [paragraph 17 for radome 4 attached to housing 2 forming a predetermined gap].
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the applicant’s invention for modifying the radio wave absorber techniques, as disclosed by Mcbain, further including the semiconductor calculations as taught by Kiyokazu for the purpose to allow projections to be positioned according to an incident angle (Kiyokazu, paragraph 23).
Regarding Claim 2, Mcbain teaches the protruding parts protrude in a regular polygonal pyramidal shape or a conical shape toward the semiconductor element [0077-0078].
Regarding Claim 3, Mcbain teaches the top part and the protruding parts are integrally molded of a synthetic resin [0065, 0086].
Regarding Claim 4, Mcbain teaches the top part, the protruding parts, and the side part are integrally molded of a synthetic resin [0065, 0086].
Regarding Claim 5, Mcbain teaches the top part, the protruding parts, and the side part are integrally molded of a synthetic resin [0065, 0086].
Regarding Claim 6, Mcbain teaches the side part is provided with an engaging part for mounting on the base part [0135 for using mounting feet and soldering].
Regarding Claim 7, Mcbain teaches the side part is provided with an engaging part for mounting on the base part [0135 for using mounting feet and soldering].
Regarding Claim 8, Mcbain teaches the side part is provided with an engaging part for mounting on the base part [0135 for using mounting feet and soldering].
Regarding Claim 9, Mcbain teaches the protruding parts have a protruding height from the inner face of the top part to a tip part of 0.1 mm or more and 2.0 mm or less [0102 for a height about 2 mm (less than 2 mm)].
Regarding Claim 10, Mcbain teaches the protruding parts have a protruding height from the inner face of the top part to a tip part of 0.1 mm or more and 2.0 mm or less [0082-0083 for using dielectric constant between 1-2].
Regarding Claim 11, Mcbain teaches the protruding parts have a protruding height from the inner face of the top part to a tip part of 0.1 mm or more and 2.0 mm or less [0102 for a height about 2 mm (less than 2 mm)].
Regarding Claim 12, Mcbain teaches the protruding parts have a protruding height from the inner face of the top part to a tip part of 0.1 mm or more and 2.0 mm or less [0102 for a height about 2 mm (less than 2 mm)].
Regarding Claim 13, Mcbain teaches the protruding parts have a relative permittivity of a material of the protruding parts of 4 or more and 26 or less [0082-0083 for using dielectric constants and 0086 for 10].
Regarding Claim 14, Mcbain teaches the protruding parts have a relative permittivity of a material of the protruding parts of 4 or more and 26 or less [0082-0083 for using dielectric constants and 0086 for 10].
Regarding Claim 15, Mcbain teaches the protruding parts have a relative permittivity of a material of the protruding parts of 4 or more and 26 or less [0082-0083 for using dielectric constants and 0086 for 10].
Regarding Claim 16, Mcbain teaches the protruding parts have a relative permittivity of a material of the protruding parts of 4 or more and 26 or less [0082-0083 for using dielectric constants and 0086 for 10].
Regarding Claim 17, Mcbain teaches the protruding parts have a relative permittivity of a material of the protruding parts of 4 or more and 26 or less [0082-0083 for using dielectric constants and 0086 for 10].
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Mikami et al (US 2020/0021036 A1) has a radio wave absorber including: a support; a first radio wave absorption layer having a flat plate shape that is disposed on a surface of the support and includes a radio wave absorption material and a binder.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SAMARINA MAKHDOOM whose telephone number is (703)756-1044. The examiner can normally be reached Monday – Thursdays from 8:30 to 5:30 pm eastern time.
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, William Kelleher can be reached on 571-272-7753 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.
/SAMARINA MAKHDOOM/
Examiner, Art Unit 3648