Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
1. The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Detailed Action
2. This office action is in response to the filing with the office dated 08/22/2026.
Reply to Applicant’s arguments
3. Applicant’s arguments and claim amendments filed with the office on 08/22/2026 have been fully considered; Amendments to claim 1 by incorporating limitations from the dependent claim 5 change the scope; however, with a view towards keeping the prosecution record clear, a second Non-final rejection is being issued. Please see the rejection below for claims 1, 3, 4, 6-10 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 (a) as being unpatentable over Nagashima (US 2004/0155824 A1) and in view of Bartko et al (US 2018/0321292 A1).
Claim Rejections – 35 U.S.C. 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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
4. Claims 1, 3, 4, 6-10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nagashima (US 2004/0155824 A1) and in view of Bartko et al (US 2018/0321292 A1).
Regarding independent claim 1, Nagashima (US 2004/0155824 A1) teaches, A test system configured to perform wireless test on a device under test to obtain electromagnetic radiation performance (electromagnetic wave measuring apparatus 10, figure 5 paragraphs [0058]-[0064]), wherein the test system comprises a bearing platform (element 104, holder which holds an antenna 300 to be measured), a plurality of test antennas (probe antennas element 102, figure 5, paragraphs [0058]) and a motion mechanism (element 112 installing unit, figure5, paragraph [0058]); the bearing platform is configured to carry the device under test
PNG
media_image1.png
689
439
media_image1.png
Greyscale
(element 104, holder which holds an antenna 300 to be measured as shown in figure 5); the test antennas have a preset angular interval relative to the bearing platform (figure 5); wherein the test antennas are distributed in an arc shape with the bearing platform as a center of a circle of which the arc is a part, and an arc sampling is performed on a section in an elevation direction of the device under test (an antenna to be measured 300 radiates an electromagnetic wave based on an RF output signal supplied thereto. The holder 104 holds the measured antenna 300. Each probe antenna 102 detects the electromagnetic wave radiated from the measured antenna 300. The installing unit 112 holds the probe antennas 102 on a circle having a center substantially at the holder 104 (hereinafter, simply referred to as an installation ring) with constant intervals. Alternatively, the installing unit 112 may hold the probe antennas 102 on a circular arc the center of which is positioned substantially at the holder 104. The electromagnetic wave absorber 110 is provided to cover the probe antennas 102, thereby absorbing the electromagnetic wave radiated from the measured antenna 300. The fixed antenna 114 is arranged on a position away from the measured antenna 300 by a predetermined distance so that the fixed antenna 114 can detect the electromagnetic wave radiated from the measured antenna 300. The optical fiber 118 transmits detection signals that indicate the electromagnetic wave detected by the respective probe antennas 102 (paragraph [0036]); the motion mechanism further comprises a driving unit configured to drive the motion units to allow the test antennas to reach a plurality of sampling points (paragraphs [0022], [0039]), the sampling points are located at different angles of the bearing platform (figure 5, paragraph [0039]), an angular interval of the sampling point relative to the bearing platform being less than the preset angular interval (paragraphs [0039], [0063], [0064]);
Regarding the limitation, the motion mechanism comprises at least two motion units, each motion unit being equipped with the test antennas, Nagashima (US 2004/0155824 A1) teaches, “The motion mechanism comprises [0036] The installing unit 112 holds the probe antennas 102 on a circle having a center substantially at the holder 104 (hereinafter, simply referred to as an installation ring) with constant intervals. Alternatively, the installing unit 112 may hold the probe antennas 102 on a circular arc the center of which is positioned substantially at the holder 104”.
Nagashima et al fails to teach, the motion mechanism comprises a guide rail and at least two motion units, each motion unit being a slider that can move along the guide rail and being equipped with the test antennas, the at least two test antennas of a same motion unit are moved synchronously, and the movement of different motion units can be independent of each other or be carried out simultaneously.
Bartko et al (US 2018/0321292 A1) teaches, A portable anechoic chamber for testing a device under test, comprises a number of test antennas, each test antenna having at least one polarization, an antenna positioning means for positioning at least one of the test antennas in elevation direction relative to the device under test, and a device positioning means for positioning the device under test in azimuth direction (abstract).[0084] FIG. 2 shows a schematic drawing of another portable anechoic chamber 200 in a side view. The portable anechoic chamber 200 is based on the portable anechoic chamber 100. Therefore, the portable anechoic chamber 200 comprises the door 211, the device positioning means 209 with the device under
PNG
media_image2.png
356
342
media_image2.png
Greyscale
test 290 and the test antennas 201-207. [0085] However in the portable anechoic chamber 200 the antenna positioning means 208 carries an arc-shaped guide 217 that carries three test antennas 207, 215, 216. It is understood that the number of three test antennas 207, 215, 216 is just exemplarily chosen for purpose of explanation and that any other number of test antennas 207, 215, 216 may be provided on the arc-shaped guide 217. [0086] The antenna positioning means 208 itself cannot only move the arc-shaped guide 217 up and down but also rotate the arc-shaped guide 217. The arc-shaped guide 217 allows moving the test antennas 207, 215, 216 along the arc-shaped guide 217. Any type of slides or carriages may be provided on the arc-shaped guide 217 that allow moving the test antennas 207, 215, 216 along the arc-shaped guide 217. [0087] It can be seen that by moving the test antennas 207, 215, 216 on the arc-shaped guide 217 the test antennas 207, 215, 216 are also tilted such that they always point in the direction of the device under test 290). Please see figure 2, 4 and 5 and their description.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to have modified the teachings of Nagashima by providing arc shaped guides as taught by Bartko et al for movement of the motion units.
One of the ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make such a modification so that the positioning unit comprising guides or rails with a slide attached may be used to move the antenna on an arc-shaped path as taught by Bartko et al (paragraphs [0021] - [0022]).
Bartko discloses an antenna positioning means for positioning at least one of the test antennas in elevation direction relative to the device under test, and a device positioning means for positioning the device under test in azimuth direction, but does not teach two motion units.
However, providing multiple motion units would only amount to duplication parts. “Mere duplication of parts has no patentable significance unless a new and unexpected result is produced” MPEP 2144.04 VI.B.
Regarding dependent claim 3, Nagashima (US 2004/0155824 A1) and Bartko et al (US 2018/0321292 A1) teach the test system according to claim 1.
Nagashima further teaches, further comprising a test instrument for sampling when the test antennas reach the sampling points (figure 5, [0037] The supplying unit 204 supplies the RF output signal to the measured antenna 300. The measuring unit 206 measures the electromagnetic wave radiated from the measured antenna 300 based on the detection signals respectively indicating the electromagnetic wave detected by the probe antennas 102, so as to obtain a distribution of the electromagnetic wave on the circle on which the probe antennas 102 are provided).
Regarding dependent claim 4, Nagashima (US 2004/0155824 A1) and Bartko et al (US 2018/0321292 A1) teach the test system according to claim 1.
Nagashima and Bartko et al are silent about, wherein a distance between adjacent test antennas is greater than half of a wavelength corresponding to a test frequency.
However, this requirement of a distance between adjacent test antennas being greater than or equal to half of a wavelength corresponding to a test frequency is well known in the art, facilitating the evaluation of Antenna characteristics in the Far field region.
Evidence: Garreau et al (US 20100320996 A1) teaches, ([0008] The best known is given by the minimum distance equal to .lamda./2 between the sampling points on the minimum sphere surrounding the source, a minimum sphere of diameter D and whereof the centre coincides with the centre of the network. This corresponds to angular spacing between the measuring probes of the network equal to .lamda./D. The same applies to measurements in planar geometry, and the criterion sampling is given by the minimum distance equal to .lamda./2 between the sampling points on a plane in front of the source. This corresponds to spacing between the measuring probes of the network equal to .lamda./2).
Please also see (Gandois et al (US 2011/0121839 A1), Falck et al (US 8880002 B2), and Kyosti et al (US 20110191090 A1)) cited in the relevant prior art section of the previous office action.
Regarding dependent claim 6, Nagashima (US 2004/0155824 A1) and Bartko et al (US 2018/0321292 A1) teach the test system according to claim 1.
Nagashima further teaches, wherein the bearing platform is a one-dimensional rotating platform (figure 5).
Regarding dependent claim 7, Nagashima (US 2004/0155824 A1) and Bartko et al (US 2018/0321292 A1) teach the test system according to claim 1.
Nagashima further teaches, wherein one of the motion units is equipped with a radio frequency switch which is connected to all of the test antennas (RF switch 208, figure 5).
Regarding dependent claim 8, Nagashima (US 2004/0155824 A1) and Bartko et al (US 2018/0321292 A1) teach the test system according to claim 1.
Bartko et al (US 2018/0321292 A1) teaches, wherein each of the motion units is equipped with a radio frequency switch which is connected to the test antennas in a corresponding motion unit ([0041] The signal processing means may e.g. comprise any signal processing stage that may be necessary to process the signals received by the test antennas. Such signal processing means may e.g. comprise analog-to-digital converters, filters, frequency converters, mixers, amplifier, attenuators, or the like. The signal processing means may e.g. be provided as discrete elements, DSPs, ASICs, FPGAs or any combination of these. [0099] In the portable anechoic chamber 400 a signal processing means 425 is provided on the arc-shaped guide 417. Another signal processing means 426 is provided on the device positioning means 409. It is understood, that the signal processing means 425 can be connected by any type of cables or busbars to the test antennas 407, 415, 416. The same applies to the signal processing means 426 and the device under test 490).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to have modified the teachings of Nagashima by providing signal processing means provided on the device positioning means as taught by Bartko et al (paragraphs [0041], [0099]).
One of the ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make such a modification so that the positioning unit comprising signal processing means that may be necessary to process the signals received by the test antennas, as taught by Bartko et al (paragraphs [0041], [0099]).
PNG
media_image1.png
689
439
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding independent claim 9, Nagashima (US 2004/0155824 A1) teaches, A test method for performing wireless test on a device under test to obtain electromagnetic radiation performance (electromagnetic wave measuring apparatus 10, figure 5 paragraphs [0058]-[0064]), comprising: arranging the device under test on a bearing platform (element 104, holder which holds an antenna 300 to be measured); the test antennas being arranged with a preset angular interval with respect to the bearing platform (figure 5); and driving the motion unit to allow the test antennas to reach a plurality of sampling points and sampling, the sampling points being located at different angles of the bearing platform (figure 5, paragraph [0039]), and an angular interval of the sampling point relative to the bearing platform being less than the preset angular interval (paragraphs [0039], [0063], [0064]); and the test antennas being distributed in an arc shape with the bearing platform as a center of a circle of which the arc is a part; performing an arc sampling on a section in an elevation direction of the device under test (an antenna to be measured 300 radiates an electromagnetic wave based on an RF output signal supplied thereto. The holder 104 holds the measured antenna 300. Each probe antenna 102 detects the electromagnetic wave radiated from the measured antenna 300. The installing unit 112 holds the probe antennas 102 on a circle having a center substantially at the holder 104 (hereinafter, simply referred to as an installation ring) with constant intervals. Alternatively, the installing unit 112 may hold the probe antennas 102 on a circular arc the center of which is positioned substantially at the holder 104. The electromagnetic wave absorber 110 is provided to cover the probe antennas 102, thereby absorbing the electromagnetic wave radiated from the measured antenna 300. The fixed antenna 114 is arranged on a position away from the measured antenna 300 by a predetermined distance so that the fixed antenna 114 can detect the electromagnetic wave radiated from the measured antenna 300. The optical fiber 118 transmits detection signals that indicate the electromagnetic wave detected by the respective probe antennas 102 (paragraph [0036]).
Regarding the limitation dividing a plurality of test antennas into at least two groups and mounting each group thereof on a motion unit, Nagashima (US 2004/0155824 A1) teaches, “The motion mechanism comprises [0036] The installing unit 112 holds the probe antennas 102 on a circle having a center substantially at the holder 104 (hereinafter, simply referred to as an installation ring) with constant intervals. Alternatively, the installing unit 112 may hold the probe antennas 102 on a circular arc the center of which is positioned substantially at the holder 104”.
Nagashima et al fails to teach dividing a plurality of test antennas into at least two groups and mounting each group thereof on a motion unit; wherein each motion unit is equipped with at least two test antennas, the at least two test antennas of a same motion unit are moved synchronously, and the movement of different motion units can be independent of each other or be carried out simultaneously.
PNG
media_image2.png
356
342
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Bartko et al (US 2018/0321292 A1) teaches, A portable anechoic chamber for testing a device under test, comprises a number of test antennas, each test antenna having at least one polarization, an antenna positioning means for positioning at least one of the test antennas in elevation direction relative to the device under test, and a device positioning means for positioning the device under test in azimuth direction (abstract).[0084] FIG. 2 shows a schematic drawing of another portable anechoic chamber 200 in a side view. The portable anechoic chamber 200 is based on the portable anechoic chamber 100. Therefore, the portable anechoic chamber 200 comprises the door 211, the device positioning means 209 with the device under test 290 and the test antennas 201-207. [0085] However in the portable anechoic chamber 200 the antenna positioning means 208 carries an arc-shaped guide 217 that carries three test antennas 207, 215, 216. It is understood that the number of three test antennas 207, 215, 216 is just exemplarily chosen for purpose of explanation and that any other number of test antennas 207, 215, 216 may be provided on the arc-shaped guide 217. [0086] The antenna positioning means 208 itself cannot only move the arc-shaped guide 217 up and down but also rotate the arc-shaped guide 217. The arc-shaped guide 217 allows moving the test antennas 207, 215, 216 along the arc-shaped guide 217. Any type of slides or carriages may be provided on the arc-shaped guide 217 that allow moving the test antennas 207, 215, 216 along the arc-shaped guide 217. [0087] It can be seen that by moving the test antennas 207, 215, 216 on the arc-shaped guide 217 the test antennas 207, 215, 216 are also tilted such that they always point in the direction of the device under test 290). Please see figure 2, 4 and 5 and their description.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to have modified the teachings of Nagashima by providing arc shaped guides as taught by Bartko et al for movement of the motion units.
One of the ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make such a modification so that the positioning unit comprising guides or rails with a slide attached may be used to move the antenna on an arc-shaped path as taught by Bartko et al (paragraphs [0021] - [0022]).
Bartko discloses an antenna positioning means for positioning at least one of the test antennas in elevation direction relative to the device under test, and a device positioning means for positioning the device under test in azimuth direction, but does not teach two motion units.
However, providing multiple motion units would only amount to duplication parts. “Mere duplication of parts has no patentable significance unless a new and unexpected result is produced” MPEP 2144.04 VI.B.
Regarding dependent claim 10, Nagashima (US 2004/0155824 A1) and Bartko; Hendrik (US 2018/0321292 A1) teaches the testing method according to claim 9.
Nagashima and Bartko et al are silent about, wherein a distance between adjacent test antennas is greater than half of a wavelength corresponding to a test frequency.
However, this requirement of a distance between adjacent test antennas being greater than or equal to half of a wavelength corresponding to a test frequency is well known in the art, facilitating the evaluation of Antenna characteristics in the Far field region.
Evidence: Garreau et al (US 2010/0320996 A1) teaches, ([0008] The best known is given by the minimum distance equal to .lamda./2 between the sampling points on the minimum sphere surrounding the source, a minimum sphere of diameter D and whereof the centre coincides with the centre of the network. This corresponds to angular spacing between the measuring probes of the network equal to .lamda./D. The same applies to measurements in planar geometry, and the criterion sampling is given by the minimum distance equal to .lamda./2 between the sampling points on a plane in front of the source. This corresponds to spacing between the measuring probes of the network equal to .lamda./2).
Please also see (Gandois et al (US 2011/0121839 A1), Falck et al (US 8880002 B2), and Kyosti et al (US 2011/0191090 A1)) cited in the relevant prior art section of the previous office action.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SURESH RAJAPUTRA whose telephone number is (571) 270-0477. The examiner can normally be reached between 8:00 AM - 5:00 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 on 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.
/SURESH K RAJAPUTRA/Examiner, Art Unit 2858
/NASIMA MONSUR/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2858
Prosecution Insights