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 .
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 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.
Response to Remarks/Arguments
With respect to the rejection of claim 10 under 35 USC 102(a)(2), Applicant's arguments filed 12/29/2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. Applicant argues, see page 11, paragraph 1:
The 110 dipoles are all the same. The columns do not comprise a second subcolumn of first type dipoles configured to radiate in a first frequency band and a second subcolumn of second type of dipoles configured to radiate in a second frequency band, respectively.
Examiner respectfully disagrees. As recited in the previous office action, Fig. 1 and paragraph [0002] of AAPA describe two subcolumns within each of the four columns 105a~d. Laterally adjacent dipoles in each columns are coupled to a two independent signal sources, one per polarization. A first dipole in the first subcolumn is configured in a different polarity than that of a second dipole in the second subcolum. Therefore, the first dipole is a first type dipole and the second dipole is a second type dipole. Moreover, the claim 10 does not claim the first type in a first frequency band and the second type in a second frequency band as Applicant argues above.
The claim 10 only claims both of the first type and second type dipoles radiate in a first (same) frequency band.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 10-11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Applicant Admitted Prior Art (US 20250260177 A1, herein after “AAPA”).
Regarding claim 10, AAPA teaches a multiport antenna array ([0002] Fig. 1 is a conventional high gain 8T8R array configuration), comprising:
a plurality of dipole columns (Fig. 1, 105a-d), each dipole column having a first sub-column having first dipoles of a first type and a second sub-column having second dipoles of a second type ([0002] two sub-columns of 110, different polarization), wherein the first dipoles of the first type and the second dipoles of the second type are configured to radiate in a first frequency band ([0001] C-Band), wherein the first dipoles of the first type within a corresponding first sub-column and the second dipoles of the second type within a corresponding second sub- column ([0002] vertical dipole 110) are coupled to a common signal source (a same C-Band source, different polarization).
Regarding claim 11, all the limitations of claim 1 are taught by AAPA.
AAPA further teaches the array, wherein the first dipole of the first type and the second dipole of the second type are configured to operate in a single frequency band ([0002] two sub-columns of 110, different polarization, C-Band).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 1-9 and 13 are allowed. Specifically, the independent claim 1 is allowed over the prior arts. The dependent claims 2-9 and 13 are allowed due to their dependencies to the said independent claim 1.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
Regarding claim 1, the prior arts fail to teach or reasonably suggest a multiport antenna array, wherein each of the first dipole of the first type and the second dipole of the second type of each hybrid dipole unit cell, is configured to receive a first RF signal of a single pair of RF signals and a second RF signal of the single pair of RF signals, the first and second RF signals corresponding to first and second orthogonal polarization states, respectively, in combination with the other limitations of the claim.
Claim 12 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.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
Regarding claim 12, the prior arts fail to teach or reasonably suggest an antenna array wherein the first dipoles of the first type in the first sub-column and the second dipoles of the second type in the second sub-column have a spatial offset in a vertical direction, in combination with the other limitations of the claim.
Any comments considered necessary by applicant must be submitted no later than the payment of the issue fee and, to avoid processing delays, should preferably accompany the issue fee. Such submissions should be clearly labeled “Comments on Statement of Reasons for Allowance.”
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 SEOKJIN KIM whose telephone number is (571)272-1487. The examiner can normally be reached M-F: 8:30am-5:00pm.
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, Alexander H. Taningco can be reached at 571-272-8048. 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.
/SEOKJIN KIM/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2844