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 .
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 07/02/2024 is considered by the examiner.
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 (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.
Claim(s) 1-5, 7-11, 14-15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nakamura et al. (JP 201896806 A) hereinafter ‘Nakamura’, and further in view of Naito et al. (JPH10137193), hereinafter ‘Naito’.
Regarding Claims 1, 5, 10 and 11, Nakamura discloses a dielectric spectroscopy sensor to be connected to a dielectric spectroscopy system (Abstract), the dielectric spectroscopy sensor comprising: a transmission line (Fig 1B, 22a) having a predetermined characteristic impedance matching with a characteristic impedance of the dielectric spectroscopy system (Para [0023] disclosing lines are designed in accordance with the characteristic impedance of a measurement device connected to the dielectric spectroscopy); a quasi-coaxial structure unit connected to the transmission line (Para [0024] quasi-coaxial structure defined by vias 13A and 13B and electrically connected vias 13a to metallic pattern 22A) and having a first opening having a first opening diameter (Fig. 1, disclosing circular shape around via 13B; Para [0022]); and an opening diameter adjustment unit connected to the quasi-coaxial structure unit (Para [0046] coaxial probe is provided on the front face of the substrate).
Nakamura fails to explicitly disclose the opening diameter adjustment unit having one end having the predetermined characteristic impedance, and having the other end serving as a second opening having a second opening diameter different from the first opening diameter.
Naito discloses a probe device for measuring dielectric relaxation having one end having the predetermined characteristic impedance, and having the other end serving as a second opening having a second opening diameter different from the first opening diameter, and of Claims 5, 10 and 11 the opening diameter gradually changes from the one end toward the other end, (Fig. 3; Para [0025] when the diameter of the front end surface of the internal electrode is reduced it is preferable that the ratio of the inner to outer electrode is made constant at an arbitrary position so that the impedance in the electrode is made constant, thus making it possible to prevent multiple reflection at the time of the dielectric measurement) for the benefit of preventing multiple reflection at the time of a dielectric measurement.
Therefore it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to combine and provide the probe device for measuring dielectric having one end having a predetermined characteristic impedance, and having the other end serving as a second opening having a second opening diameter different from the first opening diameter for the benefit of preventing multiple reflection at the time of a dielectric measurement as taught by Naito in Fig. 3 and Para [0025].
Regarding Claim 2, Nakamura further discloses wherein the transmission line and the quasi-coaxial structure unit include a metal pattern (Para [0021-0023] material of metallic patterns 12A and 12B, metals used in a substrate; material of metallic patterns 22A and 22B is the same as that of the metallic pattern 12A and 12B; disclosing quasi-coaxial structure) formed on a dielectric substrate (Para [0017] substrate 11 and 21 are dielectric substrates).
Regarding Claim 3, Nakamura further discloses wherein the quasi-coaxial structure unit has a first via formed at a center (Fig. 1, 13A) of a circular opening formed in the dielectric substrate, and a plurality of second vias (Fig. 1, 13B) formed along a circumference of the opening (Para [0022]).
Regarding Claims 4, 8 and 9, Nakamura in view of Naito disclose the sensor according to Claim 1 above. Naito further discloses in an alternative embodiment wherein the opening diameter adjustment unit is such that the opening diameter of the opening at the one end is the same as the opening diameter at the other end (Fig 2; Para [0024-0025]). Therefore it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to combine and provide the probe device for measuring dielectric wherein the opening diameter adjustment unit is such that the opening diameter of the opening at the one end is the same as the opening diameter at the other end for the benefit of providing an alternative structure to the probe for conducting a dielectric measurement.
Regarding Claims 7, 14, 15, Nakamura in view of Naito discloses the claimed invention except for wherein the opening diameter adjustment unit has a quasi-coaxial cable shape. It would have been an obvious matter of design choice for the opening diameter adjustment unit to have quasi-coaxial cable shape, similar to the quasi-coaxial teaching of Nakamura in Para [0024], since such a modification would have involved a mere change in the shape of a component. A change in shape is generally recognized as being within the level of ordinary skill in the art. In re Rose, 105 uspq 237 (CCPA 1955), In re Dailey, 149 USPQ 47 (CCPA 1976).
Claim(s) 6, 12, 13 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nakamura et al. (JP 201896806 A) hereinafter ‘Nakamura’, in view of Naito et al. (JPH10137193), hereinafter ‘Naito’, and further in view of Meany et al. (US 20160313260) hereinafter ‘Meany’.
Regarding Claims 6, 12, 13, Nakamura in view of Naito disclose the opening diameter adjustment unit is such that the opening diameter of the opening at one end is different from the opening diameter of the other end (Naito in Fig. 3, Para [0025]).
However Naito fails to disclose wherein the opening diameter adjustment unit is such that the opening diameter of the opening at the one end is different from the opening diameter at the other end, and the opening diameter changes stepwise from the one end toward the other end.
Meany discloses a coaxial waveguide in which an inner conductor is changed in a stepwise manner (Fig. 10) for the benefit of maintaining a substantially constant ratio between the inner diameter of outer conductor and the outer diameter of inner conductor, thus the characteristic impedance of coaxial probe remains constant along the probes direction (Para [0076]).
Therefore it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to combine and provide the probe device for measuring dielectric such that the opening diameter of the opening at the one end is different from the opening diameter at the other end, and the opening diameter changes stepwise from the one end toward the other end for the benefit of maintaining a substantially constant ratio between the inner diameter of outer conductor and the outer diameter of inner conductor, thus the characteristic impedance of coaxial probe remains constant along the probes direction is provided as taught by Meany in Para [0076] and Fig. 10.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ALESA ALLGOOD whose telephone number is (571)270-5811. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 7:30 AM-3:30 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 at (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.
/ALESA ALLGOOD/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2858