Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/720,583

STRUCTURE FOR ANTENNAE

Non-Final OA §102§103§112
Filed
Jun 14, 2024
Examiner
CRAWFORD, JASON
Art Unit
2844
Tech Center
2800 — Semiconductors & Electrical Systems
Assignee
Thales Nederland B V
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
85%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
2y 0m
To Grant
94%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 85% — above average
85%
Career Allow Rate
907 granted / 1069 resolved
+16.8% vs TC avg
Moderate +9% lift
Without
With
+8.9%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Fast prosecutor
2y 0m
Avg Prosecution
29 currently pending
Career history
1098
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
1.0%
-39.0% vs TC avg
§103
38.4%
-1.6% vs TC avg
§102
45.7%
+5.7% vs TC avg
§112
4.3%
-35.7% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 1069 resolved cases

Office Action

§102 §103 §112
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 . Drawings The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. Therefore, the first antenna comprising a two-dimensional array of radiating elements and a plurality of radiating elements must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). No new matter should be entered. Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance. 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 14 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 14 recites the limitation "the lower frequency limit (f1) of the waveguide" in line 3. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. 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. Claims 1-4, 6-8, 11-13 and 15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Carceller et al. (US 2020/0235490). In regards to claim 1, Carceller discloses of a structure comprising two or more antennas, a first said antenna (for example 222) being arranged in a first surface of said structure and a second said antennae (for example 228) in a second surface of said structure (for example see at least Figs 2A-2B, 3A), and a plurality of conductive pin elements (for example 220) arranged in one or more parallel rows intersecting a propagation path between said first antenna (222) and said second antenna (228, for example see at least Figs 2A-2B, 3A). In regards to claim 2, Carceller discloses of the structure of claim 1, wherein said plurality of conductive pin elements (12) are arranged at a periphery of said antenna (for example see at least Figs 2A-2B, 3A). In regards to claim 3, Carceller discloses of the structure of claim 1, wherein said plurality of conductive pin elements are arranged in one or more rows parallel to a periphery of said antenna (for example see at least Figs 2A-2B, 3A). In regards to claim 4, Carceller discloses of the structure of claim 1, wherein said plurality of conductive pin elements is arranged in two or more rows parallel to said periphery of said antenna (for example see at least Figs 2A-2B, 3A). In regards to claim 6, Carceller discloses of the structure of claim 1, wherein the distance between each adjacent pair of pins in a given said row is a predetermined distance (for example see at least Figs 2A-2B, 3A). In regards to claim 7, Carceller discloses of the structure of claim 6, wherein the diameter of each said pin is less than said predetermined distance (for example see at least Figs 2A-2B, 3A). In regards to claim 8, Carceller discloses of the structure of claim 1, wherein the pins of a first said row are offset with respect to a second, adjacent said row parallel to said first row, along the axis of said first row, by an amount between 0.5 times the distance between adjacent pins in the same row and zero (for example see at least Figs 2A-2B, 3A). In regards to claim 11, Carceller discloses of the structure of claim 1, wherein said first antenna comprises a two-dimensional array of radiating elements, and a proximal extremity of each said pin in at least one said row coincides with said plane of said two-dimensional array (for example see phased array example in Figs 10A-10E). In regards to claim 12, Carceller discloses of the structure of claim 1, wherein said first antenna comprises a plurality of radiating elements, and wherein no said pins are provided between said radiating elements (for example see phased array example in Figs 10A-10E, and pins below each respective first antenna in at least Figs 2A-2B, 3A). In regards to claim 13, Carceller discloses of the structure of claim 12, wherein said plurality of conductive pin elements are arranged in one or more rows parallel to an outer periphery of said plurality of radiating elements (for example see pins at least Figs 2A-2B, 3A and phased array example in Figs 10A-10E). In regards to claim 15, Carceller discloses of the structure of claim 1, wherein at least a second said antenna (228) is positioned in a second surface of said physical structure, wherein said first surface and said second surface are in different planes (for example see at least Figs 2A-2B, 3A). 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 9-10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Carceller et al. (US 2020/0235490). In regards to claims 9 and 10, Carceller discloses of the structure of claim 1 as found within the explanation above. However, Carceller does not explicitly disclose of wherein each said pin is formed contiguously or monolithically with the structure. One having ordinary skill in the art would readily recognize the manufacturing processes of the pins for the structure can be done contiguously (i.e. formed separately) or monolithically (i.e. formed all together), for example where the formed pins (vias) will be cored/cast all together monolithically with the structure and/or then separately filled/drilled (typically metallically) in a contiguous fashion. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to have the pins formed contiguously or monolithically with the structure for providing the most efficient and cost-effective manufacturing process for the antenna structure. Allowable Subject Matter Claim 5 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: In regards to claim 5, the prior art does not disclose of the structure of claim 4, wherein said antenna is designed to operate at a predetermined wavelength, and wherein said two or more rows comprise at least an inner row and an outer row, wherein of the main axis of said inner row is separated from the main axis of said outer row by a distance greater than one said wavelength, nor would it have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to do so. Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Jason M Crawford whose telephone number is (571)272-6004. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri 6:00am-3:00pm. 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 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. /JASON M CRAWFORD/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2844
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Jun 14, 2024
Application Filed
Nov 17, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §102, §103, §112 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12603436
Electronic Devices with Lower Antenna Switching
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12603034
CMOS CIRCUIT
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12603439
WAVEGUIDES AND WAVEGUIDE SENSORS WITH SIGNAL-IMPROVING GROOVES AND/OR SLOTS
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12604380
Method and Apparatus for Calculating Duty Cycle of Lighting, Terminal, and Storage Medium
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12586625
STATEFUL LOGIC-IN-MEMORY USING SILICON DIODES
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

AI Strategy Recommendation

Get an AI-powered prosecution strategy using examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Powered by AI — typically takes 5-10 seconds

Prosecution Projections

1-2
Expected OA Rounds
85%
Grant Probability
94%
With Interview (+8.9%)
2y 0m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 1069 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allow rate.

Sign in with your work email

Enter your email to receive a magic link. No password needed.

Personal email addresses (Gmail, Yahoo, etc.) are not accepted.

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month