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 Amendment
The amendment filed 02/26/2026 has been entered. Claims 1-9 have been cancelled. Claims 10-18 are currently pending. Amendments to the claims have overcome some of the 112(b) rejections set forth in the Non-Final Office Action dated 11/28/2025.
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.
Claim 11 is 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.
Claim 11 recites “wherein said patch is portions which have been completely removed from the circular shape of said lower base”. However, the relationship between patch, the slots, and the lower base is still not clear. Para. [0041] of the instant Specification states “the patch (1) is obtained by removing the first slot (1.1) and the second slot (1.2)”. However, para. [0021] states “the slits [sic] are designed as two mutually located recesses in the patch plane of the circular microstrip patch antenna”, and para. [0049] states “the first slot (1.1) and the second slot (1.2) are designed as two recesses placed opposite each other in a circular form and the resulting shape forms the patch (1)”. Paras. [0021] and [0049] appear to indicate that the slots, rather than the patch, are formed by removing a portion of the patch, and that the slots do not extend all the way through the lower base. Is this correct?
Looking at figure 1 of the drawings, the slots 1.1 and 1.2 are shown as being higher than the patch 1, which corresponds to the limitation of claim 2, but contradicts paras. [0021] and [0049]. Clarification is required.
For examination purposes, claim 11 is interpreted as best understood.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 10 and 12-18 are allowable.
Claim 11 would be allowable if rewritten to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 2nd paragraph, set forth in this Office action and to include all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
The following is the Examiner’s statement for reasons of allowance.
Upon conclusion of a comprehensive search of the pertinent prior art, the Office indicates that the claims are allowable. The pertinent prior art, as a whole, or in combination, cannot be reasonably construed as adequately teaching or suggesting the elements and features of the claimed invention(s) as arranged, disposed, or provided in the manner as claimed by the Applicant.
For example, regarding claim 10, Nomoto (EP 0394960 A1 – of record) discloses (fig. 4 below) “A microstrip patch antenna (abstract) comprising: a lower base (11) having a shape on a horizontal plane and a pair of concave surfaces along vertical axes; a ground plane (33) positioned in a lower portion of said lower base (11), wherein a top surface of said lower base is a single piece; a patch (radiation conductor 32), wherein said lower base (11) and said patch (32) are fixed in a single piece that is built to work in a wide frequency range (¶38, “the present microstrip antenna has wide operational frequency band while maintaining the advantages of a microstrip antenna”); and an impedance matching line (feed line 14; ¶14, “the impedance matching for the maximum bandwidth is possible by proper adjustment of a feed point.”) electrically connected to said patch (32) and said lower base (11)”.
Nomoto does not teach, or suggest, a lower base having a circular shape, said ground plane having a concave shape; the patch having a first slot and a second slot, and a supply connector positioned along the lower base, said supply connector positioned between said impedance matching line and said ground plane.
PNG
media_image1.png
193
379
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Itoh et al. (US 2002/0036590 – of record; “Itoh”) discloses (figs. 1A & 1B below) “A microstrip patch antenna (wave antenna 10) comprising: a lower base (substrate 11) having a circular shape on a horizontal plane; a ground plane (16) positioned in a lower portion of said lower base, wherein a top surface of said lower base is a single piece; a patch (14), wherein said lower base and said patch are fixed in a single piece; and an impedance matching line (feedlines 17, 18, and ¶55) connected to said patch (14) and said lower base (11)”.
PNG
media_image2.png
420
258
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Itoh does not teach, or suggest, the lower base having a pair of concave surfaces along vertical axes; said ground plane having a concave shape; the patch having a first slot and a second slot, wherein said lower base and said patch are built to work in a wide frequency range; the impedance matching line electrically connected to said patch (the feedlines 17 and 18 are electromagnetically coupled to the patch); a supply connector positioned along said lower base, said supply connector positioned between said impedance matching line and said ground plane.
IDS document Zhang et al. (CN 113594673 – of record; hereinafter Zhang) discloses (figs. 2 & 3 below) “a microstrip patch antenna (dielectric composite flexible substrate 1), comprising: a lower base (1) having a shape on a horizontal plane and one concave surface along vertical axes along vertical axes; a ground plane (3) having a concave shape, wherein a top surface of said lower base is a single piece; a patch (32) having a first slot, wherein the lower base and the patch are fixed in a single piece form that is built to work in a wide frequency range (abstract); and an impedance matching line (coplanar feed line 2) electrically connected to said patch (32) and said lower base (1)”.
PNG
media_image3.png
289
311
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Zhang does not teach, or suggest, a lower base having a circular shape and a pair of concave surfaces along vertical axes; the ground plane positioned in a lower portion of said lower base; the patch having a second slot; a supply connector positioned along said lower base, said supply connector positioned between said impedance matching line and said ground plane.
Inoue (US 2004/0051675 – of record) discloses (figs. 29-35) “A microstrip patch antenna (200) comprising: a lower base (210) having a circular shape on a horizontal plane; a ground plane (211 & 213) positioned in a lower portion of said lower base (210), wherein a top surface of said lower base is a single piece; a patch (202, 203), wherein said lower base and said patch are fixed in a single piece that is built to work in a wide frequency range (abstract, “capable of operating in a plurality of different frequency bands”); and an impedance matching line (feed pattern 204) connected to said patch and said lower base; a supply connector (feed point 202b) positioned along said lower base (210)”.
Inoue does not teach, or suggest, the lower base having a pair of concave surfaces along vertical axes; said ground plane having a concave shape; the patch having a first slot and a second slot, the impedance matching line electrically connected to the patch (¶99, the feed 204 is electromagnetically coupled to the first antenna) and lower base, and the supply connector positioned between said impedance matching line and said ground plane.
Claims 12-18 are allowable due to their dependency on claim 10.
PNG
media_image4.png
468
224
media_image4.png
Greyscale
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 ANNA N HAMADYK whose telephone number is (703)756-1672. The examiner can normally be reached 7:30 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, Dimary Lopez can be reached at (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.
/ANNA N HAMADYK/Examiner, Art Unit 2845
/DIMARY S LOPEZ CRUZ/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2845