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 12/09/2025 has been entered. Claims 1-20 are currently pending. Amendments to the abstract and the claims have overcome the objections set forth in the Non-Final Office Action dated 09/24/2025.
Claim Objections
Claims 7 and 15 are objected to because of the following informalities:
Claim 7 (line 10): “1D gain pattern” should read “1D gain patterns”.
Claim 7 (line 11): “1D phase pattern” should read “1D phase patterns”.
Claim 15 (line 12): “1D gain pattern” should read “1D gain patterns”, and “1D phase pattern” should read “1D phase patterns”.
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 2 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 2 recites “wherein the transceiver is further configured to transmit a second signal to, or receive a second signal from, at least one of the first reflector, the second reflector and the DUT, wherein the first signal emitter/receiver and the second signal emitter/receiver are configured to respectively transmit the signal and receive the signal in response to the transmitted second signal”.
Firstly, there is insufficient antecedent basis for “the signal” in the claim. Secondly, it is not clear which signal this refers to. Does it refer to the first signal, or to another signal? Clarification is required.
For examination purposes, claim 2 is interpreted as best understood.
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 1-3, 6-7, 11-12, 15-17 and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Rowell et al. (US 2019/0302184 – of record; “Rowell1”) in view of Trichopoulos et al. (NPL “Design and evaluation of reconfigurable intelligent surfaces in real-world environment”, published Sept. 2021; “Trich”).
PNG
media_image1.png
312
358
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Claim 1: Rowell1 discloses (fig. 2 shown above, and figs. 1 & 3) “A system for measuring a signal pattern (measurement system for testing a device under test with at least two antennas, at least two reflectors, abstract), comprising:
a first reflector (28) comprising a first reflector surface configured to generate a plane wave (¶20, “each of the reflectors is configured to generate and/or collimate a planar wave”);
a second reflector (28) comprising a second reflector surface configured to generate a plane wave (¶20);
a path-guiding member (¶85, beam path adjustment units 24 and connecting joint and/or bearing) coupled to the first reflector (28) and the second reflector (28) (see Examiner’s note below), and configured to move the first reflector and the second reflector along a predetermined path (path indicated by curved arrow in fig. 2. ¶85, “both linear rails 48 can be moved relative to each other and independently from each other about rotational axis A”);
a stage (test location 30) configured to hold a device under test (DUT) (32) (¶92, “both embodiments shown can be used for testing the device under test 32 that has been placed on the test location 30”), the DUT having a surface (¶56, “The device under test 32 may be a mobile communication device, for instance a mobile phone, a tablet or any other suitable mobile end device.”. A mobile phone has a surface)”.
Rowell1 does not explicitly disclose “a transceiver configured to transmit a first signal to one of the first reflector and the second reflector”. However, Rowell1 teaches signal generation and/or analysis equipment (34) configured to transmit a signal to, or receive the signal from, the first reflector (28), the second reflector (28), and the DUT (¶¶58-59, “signal generation and/or analysis equipment 34 can be configured to generate an electromagnetic signal that is transmitted via the integrated beam path adjustment unit 24 towards the device under test 32, for example the respective antennas 26, in order to test the receiving characteristics of the device under test 32. Alternatively, or additionally, the signal generation and/or analysis equipment 34 is configured to analyze em signals received via the integrated beam path adjustment units 24, for example the respective antennas 26, which have been transmitted by the device under test 32 so that the transmission characteristics of the device under test 32 can be measured appropriately”)”.
It would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to modify the system of Rowell1 to include a transceiver configured to transmit a first signal to one of the first reflector and the second reflector. Doing so allows signals to be sent to, and received from, a DUT in a compact device.
Rowell1 does not disclose “a transceiver configured to receive the first signal reflected by the surface of the DUT from the other one of the first reflector and the second reflector”.
Trich teaches (figs. 15 and 16, for example) a device under test having a reflective surface (Section I, p. 2; “At mmWave/THz bands, Reconfigurable Intelligent Surfaces (RIS) provide a potential solution for the critical coverage challenge by intelligently reflecting the wireless signals to the receiver direction). Figures 15 and 16 show a measurement setup comprising an RIS, a transmitter, and a receiver placed in the far-field. According to Section IV.A. (p. 18) of Trich, the setup in Fig. 15 utilizes a transceiver configured to transmit a first signal to the transmitter and receive the first signal reflected by the surface of the RIS (the National Instruments USRP-2901 is a transceiver).
As shown in fig. 16, the receiver can be rotated in a circular arc to capture reflected signals from the RIS (Section V. B., p. 22). Trich also teaches (Section III. B., p. 13) that, to simulate the beamforming characteristics of the RIS in the far-field, a feed horn antenna can be replaced by a plane wave excitation.
One of ordinary skill in the art would recognize that the DUT of Rowell1 could be replaced by a DUT having a surface (such as an RIS). The motivation to do so would be to test the beamforming characteristics of the RIS using a measurement setup that utilizes plane waves, which simulate testing in the far-field.
It would therefore have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to modify the system of Rowell1 to include a transceiver configured to receive the first signal reflected by the surface of the DUT from the other one of the first reflector and the second reflector. Such a modification to the transceiver is necessitated by the use of an RIS as the device under test.
Claim 2: the modified Rowell1 teaches the system of claim 1.
Rowell1 discloses, as best understood, in fig. 2, “a first signal emitter/receiver disposed on a first one of the first reflector (28), the second reflector (28) and the DUT (32), and electrically coupled to the transceiver (34) (¶56, “the device under test 32 may be a mobile communication device, which has an antenna”; ¶57, “The measurement system 10 further comprises a signal generation and/or analysis equipment 34 that is assigned to the integrated beam path adjustment units 24 and/or the device under test 32”); and
a second signal emitter/receiver disposed on a second one of the first reflector (28), the second reflector (28) and the DUT (32), and electrically coupled to the transceiver (34) (¶13, “the respective characteristics of the device under test with regard to the MIMO and/or RRM characteristics can be tested”, therefore the mobile communication device may comprise a second signal emitter/receiver to implement MIMO),
wherein the transceiver is further configured to transmit a second signal to, or receive the second signal from, at least one of the first reflector, the second reflector and the DUT (¶59, “the signal generation and/or analysis equipment 34 is configured to analyze electromagnetic signals received via the integrated beam path adjustment units 24, for example the respective antennas 26, which have been transmitted by the device under test 32 so that the transmission characteristics of the device under test can be measured”),
wherein the first signal emitter/receiver and the second signal emitter/receiver (disposed on mobile communication device) are configured to respectively transmit the signal and receive the signal in response to the transmitted second signal (¶91 & ¶94, the device under test can receive and transmit signals according to signals generated by the signal generation equipment 34)”.
Examiner’s note – Regarding the recitation that an element is ‘configured to’ perform a function, it is the position of the office that such limitations are not positive structural limitations, and thus, only require the ability to so perform. In this case, the prior art applied herein is construed as at least possessing such ability.
According to MPEP 2112.01, when the structure recited in the reference is substantially identical to that of the claims, claimed properties or functions are presumed to be inherent. Where the claimed and prior art products are identical or substantially identical in structure or composition, or are produced by identical or substantially identical processes, a prima facie case of either anticipation or obviousness has been established. In re Best, 562 F.2d 1252, 1255, 195 USPQ 430, 433 (CCPA 1977). "When the PTO shows a sound basis for believing that the products of the applicant and the prior art are the same, the applicant has the burden of showing that they are not." In re Spada, 911 F.2d 705, 709, 15 USPQ2d 1655, 1658 (Fed. Cir. 1990)”.
Claim 3: the modified Rowell1 teaches the system of claim 1.
The modified Rowell1 teaches “wherein the transceiver (34) is further configured to transmit the first signal between the first reflector (28) and the second reflector (28) through the DUT (32)”.
According to ¶¶58-59 of Rowell1, the transceiver is configured to transmit a signal between the first reflector and the DUT via first antenna 26a, and the second reflector and the DUT via second antenna 26b. The transceiver is therefore capable of transmitting a signal between the first reflector and the second reflector through the DUT)”. Trich teaches the DUT is an RIS, and therefore the first signal is transmitted from one reflector to another through (via) the DUT.
Examiner’s note – Regarding the recitation that an element is ‘configured to’ perform a function, it is the position of the office that such limitations are not positive structural limitations, and thus, only require the ability to so perform. In this case, the prior art applied herein is construed as at least possessing such ability.
Claim 6: the modified Rowell1 teaches the system of claim 1.
Rowell1 discloses “wherein the path-guiding member (24 & associated connecting joint) defines a circle and a center of the circle (¶28, “both beam path adjustment units can be moved in a circular manner with respect to the same axis. The axis may correspond to the center of the test location on which the device under test is placed for testing purposes”), wherein a reflection direction of the first reflector surface or the second reflector surface is configured to point to the center during movement of the first reflector or the second reflector by the path-guiding member (see fig. 2, where the first reflector and second reflector are moving relative to one another and are pointing to the center of the test location at axis A)”.
Claim 7: the modified Rowell1 teaches the system of claim 6.
The modified Rowell1 teaches (fig. 2) “wherein the path-guiding member (24) further defines a first axis located on the circle and passes through the center of the circle (at second end 52), and the surface (DUT 32 which is placed on test location 30) passes through the center of the circle, wherein the stage (30) is configured to rotate the surface of the DUT around the first axis with different rotational angles (¶36, “the angular orientation of the test location may be adjustable. In other words, the test location comprises a rotational axis about which the test location (and the device under test) can be rotated.”), wherein the transceiver is further configured to transmit the first signal to the one of the first reflector and the second reflector, and receive the first signal reflected by the surface of the DUT from the other one of the first reflector (28) and the second reflector (28) regarding a first angle (see beam paths 36 of fig. 2 of Rowell1)”. Trich teaches that the DUT has a surface.
Rowell1 does not disclose “one of the different rotational angles to generate a one-dimensional (1D) gain pattern and a 1D phase pattern for the first one of the different rotational angles, and assemble a three-dimensional (3D) gain pattern and a 3D phase pattern by generating a plurality of the 1D gain patterns and a plurality of the 1D phase patterns corresponding to each of the different rotational angles including the first one of the different rotational angles”.
Trich teaches (fig. 18) “one of the different rotational angles to generate a one-dimensional (1D) gain pattern for the first one of the different rotational angles, and assemble a three-dimensional (3D) gain pattern and by generating a plurality of the 1D gain patterns corresponding to each of the different rotational angles including the first one of the different rotational angles (Section V. B., p. 23; “The feed horn is aligned in front of the RIS such that it illuminates the RIS from broadside. The reflected signals are recorded using a receiver horn antenna along a 10◦-60◦ arc with a radius of 10 m at every 2.5◦. After beam-scanning at every point, we form a reception pattern for every RIS scanning angle. The 3D surface plot of Fig. 18 shows the beamforming capability of the RIS”)”.
It would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person of ordinary skill in the art to modify the system of Rowell1 with Trich wherein the transceiver is further configured to one of the different rotational angles to generate a one-dimensional (1D) gain pattern for the first one of the different rotational angles, and assemble a three-dimensional (3D) gain pattern and by generating a plurality of the 1D gain patterns corresponding to each of the different rotational angles including the first one of the different rotational angles, as taught by Trich. Doing so allows for the performance of a reconfigurable intelligent surface to be evaluated under realistic wireless communication settings (abstract of Trich).
Trich does not teach, in figure 18, “to generate a 1D phase pattern for the first one of the different rotational angles, and assemble a 3D phase pattern by generating a plurality of the 1D phase patterns”. However, Trich teaches, in Section III.D on p. 16, the use of a vector network analyzer to measure the phase response of different states of an RIS. A 2D phase distribution diagram for different reflected directions is also shown in figs. 12 and 13.
It would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person of ordinary skill in the art to modify the system of Rowell1 with Trich wherein the transceiver is further configured to generate a 1D phase pattern for the first one of the different rotational angles, and assemble a 3D phase pattern by generating a plurality of the 1D phase patterns, as taught by Trich. Doing so allows for the performance of a reconfigurable intelligent surface to be evaluated under realistic wireless communication settings (abstract of Trich).
Independent claim 11: Rowell1 discloses (figs. 1-3) “A method for measuring a signal pattern (measurement system for testing a device under test with at least two antennas, at least two reflectors, abstract), the method comprising:
disposing a device under test (DUT) (32) on a stage (¶92, “device under test 32 placed on the test location 30”), the DUT having a surface (an electronic device has a surface);
coupling a first reflector (28) and a second reflector (28) to a path-guiding member (¶85, beam path adjustment units 24 and connecting joint and/or bearing), wherein each of the first reflector and the second reflector is configured to be moved along a predetermined path (CC) defined by the path-guiding member (path indicated by curved arrow in fig. 2. ¶85, “both linear rails 48 can be moved relative to each other and independently from each other about rotational axis A”), and
comprises a reflector surface configured to generate a plane wave (¶20, “each of the reflectors is configured to generate and/or collimate a planar wave”);
transmitting a first signal from one of the first reflector and the second reflector (see beam path 36 in fig. 2)”.
Rowell1 does not disclose “in response to the transmitted first signal, causing reflection of the first signal from the surface of the DUT and reception of the first signal from the other one of the first reflector and the second reflector”.
Trich teaches (figs. 15 and 16, for example) a device under test having a surface (reconfigurable intelligent surface, or RIS). Figures 15 and 16 show a measurement setup comprising an RIS, a transmitter, and a receiver placed in the far-field. According to Section IV.A. (p. 18) of Trich, the setup in Fig. 15 utilizes a transceiver configured to transmit a first signal to the transmitter and receive the first signal reflected by the surface of the RIS (the National Instruments USRP-2901 is a transceiver).
One of ordinary skill in the art would recognize that the DUT of Rowell1 could be replaced by a DUT having a surface (such as an RIS). The motivation to do so would be to test the beamforming characteristics of the RIS using a measurement setup that utilizes plane waves, which simulate testing in the far-field.
It would therefore have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to modify the method of Rowell1 in response to the transmitted first signal, causing reflection of the first signal from the surface of the DUT and reception of the first signal from the other one of the first reflector and the second reflector, as taught by Trich. Such a modification to the method is necessitated by the use of an RIS as the device under test, as a first signal received by the surface of the RIS will be reflected and can be received by another reflector.
Claim 12: the modified Rowell1 teaches the method of claim 11.
The modified Rowell1 teaches “wherein the first signal is transmitted between the first reflector (28) and the second reflector (28) through the DUT (32)”.
Claim 15: the modified Rowell1 teaches the method of claim 11.
The modified Rowell1 teaches (fig. 2) “wherein the path-guiding member defines a circle, a center of the circle and a first axis located on the circle and passes through the center of the circle, and the surface passes through a center of the circle (at 52), wherein the disposing of the DUT on the stage comprises rotating the surface of the DUT around the first axis with different rotational angles (¶36), wherein the method further comprises transmitting a first signal to the one of the first reflector and the second reflector and receiving the first signal reflected by the surface of the DUT from the other one of the first reflector and the second reflector corresponding to a first angle (see beam paths 36 of fig. 2 of Rowell1)”. Trich teaches that the DUT has a surface.
Rowell1 does not disclose, different rotational angles to generate a 1D gain pattern and a 1D phase pattern corresponding to the first one of the different rotational angles, and assembling a 3D gain pattern and a 3D phase pattern by generating a plurality of the 1D gain patterns and a plurality of the 1D phase patterns corresponding to the different rotational angles including the first one of the different rotational angles.
Trich teaches (fig. 18) “different rotational angles to generate a 1D gain pattern corresponding to the first one of the different rotational angles, and assembling a 3D gain pattern by generating a plurality of the 1D gain patterns corresponding to the different rotational angles including the first one of the different rotational angles (Section V. B. “The feed horn is aligned in front of the RIS such that it illuminates the RIS from broadside. The reflected signals are recorded using a receiver horn antenna along a 10◦-60◦ arc with a radius of 10 m at every 2.5◦. After beam-scanning at every point, we form a reception pattern for every RIS scanning angle. The 3D surface plot of Fig. 18 shows the beamforming capability of the RIS”)”.
It would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person of ordinary skill in the art to modify the system of Rowell1 with Trich wherein the transceiver is further configured to different rotational angles to generate a 1D gain pattern corresponding to the first one of the different rotational angles, and assembling a 3D gain pattern by generating a plurality of the 1D gain patterns corresponding to the different rotational angles including the first one of the different rotational angles, as taught by Trich. Doing so allows for the performance of a reconfigurable intelligent surface to be evaluated under realistic wireless communication settings (abstract of Trich).
Trich does not teach, in figure 18, “to generate a 1D phase pattern corresponding to the first one of the different rotational angles, and assembling a 3D phase pattern by generating a plurality of the 1D phase patterns corresponding to different rotational angles”. However, Trich teaches, in Section III.D, the use of a vector network analyzer to measure the phase response of different states of an RIS. A 2D phase distribution diagram for different reflected directions is also shown in figs. 12 and 13.
It would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person of ordinary skill in the art to modify the system of Rowell1 with Trich to generate a 1D phase pattern corresponding to the first one of the different rotational angles, and assembling a 3D phase pattern by generating a plurality of the 1D phase patterns corresponding to different rotational angles, as taught by Trich. Doing so allows for the performance of a reconfigurable intelligent surface to be evaluated under realistic wireless communication settings (abstract of Trich).
Claim 16: the modified Rowell1 teaches the method of claim 11.
Rowell1 teaches (fig. 2) “transmitting a second signal by one of the first reflector and the second reflector and receiving the second signal by the DUT (shown by the beam paths 36 of fig. 2)”.
Claim 17: the modified Rowell1 teaches the method of claim 11.
The modified Rowell1 teaches (fig. 2) “wherein the transmitting of the first signal causes the first signal to be transmitted from the first reflector (28), through the DUT (32) and received by the first reflector (28) (fig. 2 shows beam path 36 of a signal from the reflector 28 to the DUT 32 and vice versa)”. Trich teaches that the DUT can be an RIS, which reflects a signal.
Claim 19: the modified Rowell1 teaches the method of claim 11.
Rowell1 discloses “further comprising generating the first signal by a signal transceiver (34) and transmitting the first signal to one of the first reflector (28) and the second reflector (28) (¶¶58-59, “Thus, the signal generation and/or analysis equipment 34 can be configured to generate an electromagnetic signal that is transmitted via the integrated beam path adjustment unit 24 towards the device under test 32, for example the respective antennas 26, in order to test the receiving characteristics of the device under test 32. Alternatively, or additionally, the signal generation and/or analysis equipment 34 is configured to analyze electromagnetic signals received via the integrated beam path adjustment units 24, for example the respective antennas 26, which have been transmitted by the device under test 32 so that the transmission characteristics of the device under test 32 can be measured appropriately”)”.
Claims 4-5 and 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Rowell1 in view of Trich, and further in view of Rowell et al. (US 2019/0101579; hereinafter Rowell2).
Claim 4: the modified Rowell1 teaches the system of claim 3.
Rowell1 does not explicitly disclose “wherein the first reflector is configured to transmit the signal with an incident angle, and the second reflector is configured to receive a reflected signal with a reflection angle equal to the incident angle”.
However, para. 45 of Rowell1 teaches that “the antennas 26 may be moved at different offset angles with respect to the device under test so that measurements can be carried out for testing the angular behavior of the device under test”.
Rowell2, in the same field of endeavor, teaches (fig. 1, and ¶¶44-45) first and second reflectors (16) that are configured to transmit a signal with an incident angle and to receive a reflected signal with a reflection angle. Rowell2 further teaches (¶46) that both reflectors (16) are movable such that the angle of the planar wave with respect to the device under test (20) can be adjusted appropriately. Hence, the impinging angle can be varied. As both reflectors (16) are movable, the angle between the different signals is also adjustable, which means that the angle difference of the planar waves impinging on the DUT (20) can be varied appropriately for different tests. One of ordinary skill in the art would recognize that the reflectors could be positioned such that the incident angle is equal to the reflected angle depending on the required test.
It would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person of ordinary skill in the art to modify the system of Rowell1 in view of Trich with Rowell2, wherein the first reflector is configured to transmit the signal with an incident angle, and the second reflector is configured to receive a reflected signal with a reflection angle equal to the incident angle. Doing so provides a measurement system which allows for far-field testing in a compact environment in a cost-efficient manner, and further enables simulation of a MIMO device.
Claim 5: the modified Rowell1 teaches the system of claim 3.
Rowell1 does not explicitly disclose “wherein the first reflector is configured to transmit the signal with an incident angle, and the second reflector is configured to receive a reflected signal with a reflection angle unequal to the incident angle”.
Rowell2 teaches (fig. 1) “wherein the first reflector is configured to transmit the signal with an incident angle, and the second reflector is configured to receive a reflected signal with a reflection angle unequal to the incident angle (¶45, “the first reflector 16 provides a planar wave that has an angle of 90° with respect to the device under test 20 whereas the second reflector 16 provides a planar wave that has an angle of 135° with regard to the device under test 20 being located at the testing position 18”)”.
It would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person of ordinary skill in the art to modify the system of Rowell1 in view of Trich with Rowell2, wherein the first reflector is configured to transmit the signal with an incident angle, and the second reflector is configured to receive a reflected signal with a reflection angle unequal to the incident angle. Doing so provides a measurement system which allows for far-field testing in a compact environment in a cost-efficient manner, and further enables simulation of a MIMO device.
Claim 18: Rowell1 discloses the method of claim 11.
Rowell1 does not explicitly disclose “further comprising transmitting a third signal and a fourth signal such that the third signal and the fourth signal are transmitted from the respective first reflector and the second reflector at the same time and received by the DUT”.
Rowell2 teaches a measurement system comprising (fig. 1), two reflectors (16), two antennas (14), a DUT (20), and a signal generation unit (22) which may generate test signals or receive signals. Rowell2 also teaches (¶40) “two measurement antennas 14 are provided such that two base stations or two channels of a multiple-in and multiple-out system (MIMO system) can be simulated simultaneously by using the measurement system 10. Thus, the measurement antennas 14 as well as the respective reflectors 16 are operated simultaneously in a first measurement mode that corresponds to a dedicated testing scenario”. A person of ordinary skill in the art would recognize that to achieve this MIMO simulation, a second signal would be generated by the signal generation unit to instruct each of the first and second antennas 14 to emit simultaneous test signals. As shown in fig. 1, these test signals are directed towards reflectors 16 where they are reflected towards the DUT 20.
Rowell2 therefore teaches “further comprising transmitting a third signal and a fourth signal such that the third signal and the fourth signal are transmitted from the respective first reflector and the second reflector at the same time and received by the DUT”.
It would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to modify the Rowell1 method in view of Trich with Rowell2, further comprising transmitting a third signal and a fourth signal such that the third signal and the fourth signal are transmitted from the respective first reflector and the second reflector at the same time and received by the DUT. Doing so enables multiple simultaneous data streams to be provided which can be used by user equipment manufacturers and test houses for testing DUTs (¶59 of Rowell2).
Claim 8 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Rowell1 in view of Trich, and further in view of Nickel et al. (US 2013/0093447; hereinafter Nickel).
Claim 8: the modified Rowell1 teaches the system of claim 6.
Rowell1 does not disclose “wherein the stage comprises a track configured to move the DUT along an axis passing the center of the circle”.
However, Rowell1 does disclose a track configured to move an antenna towards, and away from, the center of the circle.
Nickel, in the same field of endeavor, teaches (fig. 5 below, and ¶58) that a DUT (10) may be positioned by rotating about an axis 150, or shifted up or down in the direction of arrow 156, or shifted horizontally in the direction of arrow 154.
PNG
media_image2.png
417
391
media_image2.png
Greyscale
It would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person of ordinary skill in the art to modify the system of Rowell1 in view of Trich with Nickel, wherein the stage comprises a track configured to move the DUT along an axis passing the center of the circle (i.e., in a horizontal direction). Doing so reduces the RF signal path loss between the DUT and antennas during testing (¶9 of Nickel).
Claims 9 and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Rowell1 in view of IDS document “Screenshots of a Product demonstration video by BWant Co. Ltd.” – of record (hereinafter BWant).
Claim 9: the modified Rowell1 teaches the system of claim 1.
Rowell1 discloses (figs. 2&3) “wherein the path-guiding member (24) is coupled between the stage (30) and the first reflector (28)”.
Rowell1 does not disclose “wherein the path-guiding member is a cantilever”.
BWant teaches “wherein the path-guiding member is a cantilever (multi-function cantilever)”.
It would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to modify the system of Rowell1 in view of Trich with BWant, wherein the path-guiding member is a cantilever. Doing so provides a single support structure which provides clear space below the cantilever beam and allows the reflector to move about more than one axis.
Claim 20: the modified Rowell1 teaches the method of claim 11.
Rowell1 discloses (figs. 2&3) “wherein the path-guiding member (24) is coupled between the stage (30) and one of the first reflector (28) and the second reflector (28), and configured to move the one of the first reflector and the second reflector along the predetermined path”.
Rowell1 does not disclose “wherein the path-guiding member is a cantilever”.
BWant teaches “wherein the path-guiding member is a cantilever (multi-function cantilever)”.
It would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to modify the system of Rowell1 in view of Trich with BWant, wherein the path-guiding member is a cantilever. Doing so provides a single support structure which provides clear space below the cantilever beam and allows the reflector to move about more than one axis.
Claim 10 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Rowell1 in view of Trich, and further in view of Bartko et al. (US 2018/0321292; hereinafter Bartko).
Claim 10: the modified Rowell1 teaches the system of claim 1.
Rowell1 does not disclose “wherein the path-guiding member is a sliding track including a shape of an arc following a perimeter of a circle defined by the predetermined path”.
PNG
media_image3.png
400
354
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Bartko teaches (fig. 2 above) “wherein the path-guiding member (guide 217) is a sliding track including a shape of an arc (¶86 “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.”) following a perimeter of a circle defined by the predetermined path”.
It would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to modify the system of Rowell1 in view of Trich with Bartko, wherein the path-guiding member is a sliding track including a shape of an arc following a perimeter of a circle defined by the predetermined path. Doing so allows test antennas to be fixed to the arc-shaped guide with pivotable hinges that permit rotation to adjust the polarization of the test antennas with respect to the DUT (¶88 of Bartko).
Claims 13-14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Rowell1 in view of Sorbel et al. (US 2022/0029714; hereinafter Sorbel).
Claim 13: the modified Rowell1 teaches the method of claim 12.
The modified Rowell1 discloses “wherein the transmitting of the first signal causes a reflection between the first reflector and the second reflector through the DUT (a signal transmitted from the DUT is reflected the first and/or section reflector 28, as shown by beam paths 36 in fig. 2)”. Trich teaches that the DUT is a RIS which includes a reflective surface.
Rowell1 does not disclose a “specular reflection”.
Sorbel teaches a measurement system that measures specular reflection of RF waves (abstract).
It would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to modify the system of Rowell1 in view of Trich with Sorbel, where the reflection is specular. Doing so allows the RF properties of advanced RF materials or shaped objects to be measured (¶1 and ¶3).
Claim 14: the modified Rowell1 discloses the method of claim 12.
The modified Rowell1 discloses “wherein the transmitting of the first signal causes a reflection between the first reflector and the second reflector through the DUT”. Trich teaches that the DUT is a RIS which includes a reflective surface.
Rowell1 does not disclose a “scattering reflection”.
Sorbel teaches a measurement system that measures scattering (diffuse) reflection of RF waves (abstract).
It would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to modify the system of Rowell1 in view of Trich with Sorbel, where the reflection is scattering. Doing so allows the RF properties of advanced RF materials or shaped objects to be measured (¶1 and ¶3).
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