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 .
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
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 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) 1-3, 5-7, 12-13, 17, 19, 21, 22 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over by Wayton (US 20230065251 A1) in view of Chen (US 20220037779 A1).
With regards to claim 1. Wayton disclose(s):
(Currently Amended) A radiator unit for an antenna (figs 1-9), wherein the radiator unit is configured to radiate electromagnetic waves within a frequency band (see multiple bands in [0016]), and wherein the radiator unit comprises:
a first radiating structure (105, 205, 305, 310; figs 1-2) for radiating an electromagnetic wave having a first frequency within the frequency band [0016-0017], and
a non-radiating structure (see 107; fig 4; [0019]) coupled to the first radiating structure (310/305; fig 4; [0019]),
wherein one or both of
(i) the first radiating structure (105, 205; figs 1-2) comprises a first corrugation arranged on a first planar structure of the radiator unit (see corrugation/alternate-ridges-and-grooves in figs 3a/3b), and
(ii) the non-radiating structure (see 107; fig 4; [0019])
Wayton further disclose(s):
(ii) the non-radiating structure being a balun (107; fig 4; [0019])
Wayton does not disclose(s):
(ii) the non-radiating structure comprises a second corrugation arranged on a second planar structure of the radiator unit.
Chen teaches:
(ii) the non-radiating structure comprises a second corrugation arranged on a second planar structure of the radiator unit (see balun in figs 2-4; see corrugated portions 1115; [0028]).
Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art to have modified the device/method/system of Wayton by implementing the non-radiating structure comprises a second corrugation arranged on a second planar structure of the radiator unit as disclosed by Chen in order to stop forming monopolar low-frequency oscillators that generate strong radiation as taught/suggested by Chen ([0027]).
With regards to claim 2. Wayton as modified disclose(s):
(Currently Amended) A radiator unit as claimed in claim 1,
Wayton further disclose(s):
wherein the non-radiating structure comprises a feeding structure (see 107; fig 4; [0019]) electrically coupled to the first radiating structure (105, 205; figs 1-2), and wherein the feeding structure is configured to provide an electrical signal to the first radiating structure for the first radiating structure to radiate the electromagnetic wave having the first frequency (107; [0019]).
With regards to claim 3. Wayton as modified disclose(s):
(Currently Amended) A radiator unit as claimed in claim 1,
Wayton further disclose(s):
wherein:
the first corrugation comprises a first plurality of protrusions (protrusions in 305, 320s in fig 3a/3b) formed on the first planar structure, and wherein the protrusions of the first plurality of protrusions are spaced apart from and electrically coupled to each other (see separated protrusions in 305)
With regards to claim 5. Wayton as modified disclose(s):
(Currently Amended) A radiator unit as claimed in claim 3,
Wayton further disclose(s):
wherein one or more of
a length of the protrusions of the first
a width of the protrusions of the first
a distance between neighboring protrusions of the first
vary amongst the protrusions of the first
With regards to claim 6. Wayton as modified disclose(s):
(Currently Amended) A radiator unit as claimed in claim 3,
Wayton further disclose(s):
wherein a spacing between neighboring protrusions of the first plurality of protrusions (protrusions in 305, 320s in fig 3a/3b)
With regards to claim 7. Wayton as modified disclose(s):
(Currently Amended) A radiator unit as claimed in claim 3,
Wayton further disclose(s):
wherein the radiator unit further comprises a transmission line (see perimeter in the outside of 305s; figs 3a/3b), and wherein the protrusions (protrusions in 305, 320s in fig 3a/3b) of the first plurality of protrusions are electrically coupled to each other via the transmission line (see perimeter in the outside of 305s; figs 3a/3b),.
PNG
media_image1.png
255
221
media_image1.png
Greyscale
With regards to claim 12. Wayton as modified disclose(s):
(Currently Amended) A radiator unit as claimed in claim 1,
Wayton further disclose(s):
wherein the first corrugation comprises a first metal corrugation (“aluminum” [0018]).
With regards to claim 13. Wayton as modified disclose(s):
(Currently Amended) A radiator unit as claimed in claim 1,
Wayton further disclose(s):
wherein the second corrugation comprises one or both of a second metal corrugation and a second dielectric corrugation (see 107 being a balun which involves a metal. The examiner takes the position that claim 1 includes limitation “non-radiating structure comprises a second corrugation” as an alternative limitation which has not been addressed. Therefore, any further limitation is also an alternative limitation).
With regards to claim 17. Wayton as modified disclose(s):
(Currently Amended) A radiator unit as claimed in claim 1,
Wayton further disclose(s):
further comprising a second radiating structure (115, 210) for radiating an electromagnetic wave having a second frequency within the frequency band [0017], wherein the first radiating structure is transparent to the electromagnetic wave having the second frequency ([0018]; the examiner takes the position that minimizing interference with other radiators involves transparency) and wherein the second frequency is higher than the first frequency (“mid band radiators 210” greater than low band radiator 205 [0017]).
With regards to claim 19. Wayton as modified disclose(s):
(Currently Amended) A radiator unit as claimed in claim 17,
Wayton further disclose(s):
wherein the first radiating structure (105, 205, 305, 310; figs 1-2) and the second radiating structure (115, 210) are arranged such that the first radiating structure (105/205; figs 1-2) physically covers at least partially a radiation direction of the electromagnetic wave having the second frequency radiatable by the second radiating structure (115 figs 1-2).
With regards to claim 21. Wayton as modified disclose(s):
(Currently Amended) A radiator unit as claimed claim 17,
Wayton further disclose(s):
comprising a plurality of said first radiating structures (105, 205; figs 1-2), wherein each one of the plurality of first radiating structures comprises a corresponding, respective first corrugation (protrusions in 305, 320s in fig 3a/3b), and wherein the radiating structures of the plurality of first radiating structures are arranged relatively to each other to obtain, independently from a location of the second radiating structure (115, 210), a predefined radiation pattern of electromagnetic waves having the first frequency (see low band radiators 105; [0016]).
With regards to claim 22. Wayton as modified disclose(s):
(Currently Amended) A radiator unit as claimed claim 17,
Wayton further disclose(s):
comprising a plurality of said second radiating structures (115, 210; figs 1-2), and wherein the radiating structures of the plurality of second radiating structures (115, 210; figs 1-2) are arranged relatively to each other to obtain, independently from a location of the first radiating structure (105, 205; figs 1-2) or radiating structures of the first plurality of radiating structures, a predefined radiation pattern of electromagnetic waves having the second frequency (high band radiators 115; [0016]).
Claim(s) 9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wayton (US 20230065251 A1) in view of Chen (US 20220037779 A1) as applied to claim 7 above, and further in view of Sundararajan (US 20210359414 A1).
With regards to claim 9. Wayton disclose(s):
(Currently Amended) A radiator unit as claimed in claim 7,
Wayton does not disclose(s):
wherein the protrusions of the first plurality of protrusions are arranged at least partially alternately on two sides of the transmission line.
Sundararajan teaches:
wherein the protrusions of the first plurality of protrusions are arranged at least partially alternately on two sides of the transmission line (see 570 in both sides of center transmission line in fig 5b).
Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art to have modified the device/method/system of Wayton by implementing the wherein the protrusions of the first plurality of protrusions are arranged at least partially alternately on two sides of the transmission line as disclosed by Sundararajan in order to prevent/reduce re-radiation as taught/suggested by Sundararajan ([0006]).
Claim(s) 10 and 16 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wayton (US 20230065251 A1) in view of Chen (US 20220037779 A1) as applied to claim 7 above, and further in view of Ai (US 20210367328 A1).
With regards to claim 10. Wayton disclose(s):
(Currently Amended) A radiator unit as claimed in claim 7,
Wayton does not disclose(s):
wherein one or both of the transmission line and the protrusions of the first plurality of protrusions have a thickness of less than 1 millimeter, in particular less than 0.8 millimeter.
Ai teaches:
wherein one or both of the transmission line and the protrusions of the first plurality of protrusions have a thickness of less than 1 millimeter, in particular less than 0.8 millimeter [0080].
Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art to have modified the device/method/system of Wayton by implementing the one or both of the transmission line and the protrusions of the first plurality of protrusions have a thickness of less than 1 millimeter, in particular less than 0.8 millimeter as disclosed by Ai in order to improve performance as taught/suggested by Ai ([0080]).
With regards to claim 16. Wayton disclose(s):
(Currently Amended) A radiator unit as claimed in any preceding claim 1,
Wayton does not disclose(s):
wherein one or both of the first corrugation and the second corrugation are comprised in or formed on a printed circuit board.
Ai teaches:
wherein one or both of the first corrugation and the second corrugation are comprised in or formed on a printed circuit board [0022].
Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art to have modified the device/method/system of Wayton by implementing the one or both of the first corrugation and the second corrugation are comprised in or formed on a printed circuit board as disclosed by Ai in order to improve performance as taught/suggested by Ai ([0080]).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim(s) 11, 14, 15, 23, and 24 is/are 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.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to the claims have been considered but are moot because the arguments do not apply to any of the references being used in the current rejection.
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 extension fee 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 date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to RENAN LUQUE whose telephone number is (571)270-1044. The examiner can normally be reached on M-F 9:00AM-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, Jessica Han can be reached on 571-272-2078. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see https://ppair-my.uspto.gov/pair/PrivatePair. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/RENAN LUQUE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2896