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(s) (IDS) is/are in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement(s) is/are being considered by the examiner.
Double Patenting
The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory double patenting rejection is appropriate where the conflicting claims are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969).
A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on nonstatutory double patenting provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with the examined application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. See MPEP § 717.02 for applications subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA as explained in MPEP § 2159. See MPEP § 2146 et seq. for applications not subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b).
The filing of a terminal disclaimer by itself is not a complete reply to a nonstatutory double patenting (NSDP) rejection. A complete reply requires that the terminal disclaimer be accompanied by a reply requesting reconsideration of the prior Office action. Even where the NSDP rejection is provisional the reply must be complete. See MPEP § 804, subsection I.B.1. For a reply to a non-final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.111(a). For a reply to final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.113(c). A request for reconsideration while not provided for in 37 CFR 1.113(c) may be filed after final for consideration. See MPEP §§ 706.07(e) and 714.13.
The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The actual filing date of the application in which the form is filed determines what form (e.g., PTO/SB/25, PTO/SB/26, PTO/AIA /25, or PTO/AIA /26) should be used. A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/applying-online/eterminal-disclaimer.
Claims 1-10, 13, 15, 17, 19,and 22-27 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-27 of U.S. Patent No. 12009596. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because the scope of the instant claims encompass the scope of the claims of Patent ‘596.
Regarding claim 1, Patent ‘596 claims (claim 1) An apparatus comprising: a first antenna component comprising a first multiplexer; and a second antenna component comprising a second multiplexer; wherein the first antenna component is located next to the second antenna component within an antenna array; and wherein the first antenna component and the second antenna component are disposed within a lattice spacing of the antenna array in one axis (see claim 1).
The rest of the claims are either claimed in the subsequent dependent claims of Patent ‘596 or are obvious modifications.
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.
Claim(s) 1-3, 5-7, 9-10, 15, 19, and 22-25 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Adada et al. (U.S. Patent Application No. 20200006865), hereinafter known as Adada.
Regarding claim 1, Adada discloses (Figs. 1-10) a first antenna component (37(1)) comprising a first multiplexer ([0070],[0080]); and a second antenna component (37(2)) comprising a second multiplexer ([0070],[0080]); wherein the first antenna component is located next to the second antenna component within an antenna array (see Figs. 1-2); and wherein the first antenna component and the second antenna component are disposed within a lattice spacing of the antenna array in one axis (see Figs. 1-2).
Regarding claim 2, Adada further discloses (Figs. 1-10) wherein one or more of the first multiplexer or the second multiplexer is a diplexer comprising a first diplexer branch and a second diplexer branch ([0080]).
Regarding claim 3, Adada further discloses (Figs. 1-10) wherein one or more of the first multiplexer or the second multiplexer receives an electromagnetic signal and splits the electromagnetic signal into two frequency bands such that the first diplexer branch receives a first electromagnetic signal over a first frequency bandwidth ([0080]), and the second diplexer branch receives a second electromagnetic signal over a second frequency bandwidth that is non-overlapping with the first frequency bandwidth ([0080]).
Regarding claim 5, Adada further discloses (Figs. 1-10) wherein the first diplexer branch comprises a first length along its longitudinal axis (see Fig. 1), and wherein the second diplexer branch comprises a second length along its longitudinal axis (see Fig. 1), and wherein the first length is equal to the second length (see Fig. 1).
Regarding claim 6, Adada further discloses (Figs. 1-10) wherein: the first multiplexer comprises two multiplexer branches comprising: a first multiplexer high band branch; and a first multiplexer low band branch; and the second multiplexer comprises two multiplexer branches comprising: a second multiplexer high band branch; and a second multiplexer low band branch ([0080]).
Regarding claim 7, Adada further discloses (Figs. 1-10) wherein the first antenna component is located next to the second antenna component with alternating orientation such that: the first multiplexer high band branch is disposed next to the second multiplexer low band branch within the antenna array (see Figs. 1-2); and the first multiplexer low band branch is disposed next to the second multiplexer high band branch within the antenna array (see Figs. 1-2).
Regarding claim 9, Adada further discloses (Figs. 1-10) wherein each of the first antenna component and the second antenna component further comprises a combiner network comprising a planar cascade of combiners (39, see Figs. 1-2), wherein the planar cascade comprises a plurality of combiner stages (see Figs. 1-2).
Regarding claim 10, Adada further discloses (Figs. 1-10) wherein: the first antenna component comprises a first planar cascade of combiners that fully combine a plurality of electromagnetic signals into a first single output port (35(1)); and the second antenna component comprises a second planar cascade of combiners that fully combine a plurality of electromagnetic signals into a second single output port (35(2)), wherein the first multiplexer receives an electromagnetic signal from the first single output port associated with the first antenna component ([0070]), and wherein the second multiplexer receives an electromagnetic signal from the second single output port associated with the second antenna component ([0071]), wherein one or more of the first planar cascade of combiners or the second planar cascade of combiners comprises a cascade of H-plane combiners ([0070]).
Regarding claim 15, Adada further discloses (Figs. 1-10) wherein the apparatus is fabricated using additive manufacturing techniques in a positive Z-axis direction relative to a build plate ([0085]), and wherein all components of the apparatus are fabricated using the additive manufacturing techniques as a single metal element such that the fabrication process does not require a separate joining process for joining separate components ([see Figs. 1-2, [0085]).
Regarding claim 19, Adada further discloses (Figs. 1-10) wherein the first antenna component and the second antenna component are located next to one another and collectively fit within the lattice spacing of the antenna array in one axis (see Fig. 4), and wherein the lattice spacing is less than or equal to one wavelength of an operational frequency of the antenna array ([0076]).
Regarding claim 22, Adada further discloses (Figs. 1-10) the antenna array comprises a plurality of lattice structures (see Figs. 1-4); the apparatus is one of the plurality of lattice structures of the antenna array (see Figs. 1-2); each of the plurality of lattice structures is disposed within dimensions of the lattice spacing along one axis (see Fig. 4); and each of the plurality of lattice structures supports dual polarized radiating elements ([0072], see Fig. 4).
Regarding claim 23, Adada further discloses (Figs. 1-10) wherein the apparatus is dual polarized such that the first antenna component (33(1)) radiates an electromagnetic signal of a first polarization ([0072]), and the second antenna component (33(2)) radiates an electromagnetic signal of a second polarization ([0072), and wherein the first polarization is different from the second polarization (see Fig. 4).
Regarding claim 24, Adada further discloses (Figs. 1-10) wherein each of the first multiplexer and the second multiplexer comprises at least a first multiplexer branch and a second multiplexer branch (see Figs. 1-2), and wherein: the first multiplexer branch is used for receiving an electromagnetic signal; the second multiplexer branch is used for transmitting an electromagnetic signal; and the first multiplexer branch and the second multiplexer branch operate independently ([0072]).
Regarding claim 25, Adada further discloses (Figs. 1-10) wherein the apparatus is configured to simultaneously receive an electromagnetic signal and transmit an electromagnetic signal ([0072]).
Claim(s) 1-2, 9-12, 15-18, and 26 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Hollenbeck et al. (U.S. Patent Application No. 20190190160, made of record in IDS dated 17 August 2022), hereinafter known as Hollenbeck.
Regarding claim 1, Hollenbeck discloses (Figs. 1A-3B) a first antenna component (230) comprising a first multiplexer (260); and a second antenna component (235) comprising a second multiplexer (260); wherein the first antenna component is located next to the second antenna component within an antenna array (see Fig. 2A); and wherein the first antenna component and the second antenna component are disposed within a lattice spacing of the antenna array in one axis (see Fig. 3A).
Regarding claim 2, Hollenbeck further discloses (Figs. 1A-3B) wherein one or more of the first multiplexer or the second multiplexer is a diplexer comprising a first diplexer branch and a second diplexer branch (see Fig. 2A).
Regarding claim 9, Hollenbeck further discloses (Figs. 1A-3B) wherein each of the first antenna component and the second antenna component further comprises a combiner network comprising a planar cascade of combiners, wherein the planar cascade comprises a plurality of combiner stages (see Fig. 2A).
Regarding claim 10, Hollenbeck further discloses (Figs. 1A-3B) the first antenna component comprises a first planar cascade of combiners that fully combine a plurality of electromagnetic signals into a first single output port (265, see Fig. 2A); and the second antenna component comprises a second planar cascade of combiners that fully combine a plurality of electromagnetic signals into a second single output port (270, see Fig. 2A), wherein the first multiplexer receives an electromagnetic signal from the first single output port associated with the first antenna component (see Fig. 2A), and wherein the second multiplexer receives an electromagnetic signal from the second single output port associated with the second antenna component (see Fig. 2A), wherein one or more of the first planar cascade of combiners or the second planar cascade of combiners comprises a cascade of H-plane combiners (see Fig. 2A).
Regarding claim 15, Hollenbeck further discloses (Figs. 1A-3B) wherein the apparatus is fabricated using additive manufacturing techniques in a positive Z-axis direction relative to a build plate ([0062]), wherein all components of the apparatus are fabricated using the additive manufacturing techniques as a single metal element such that the fabrication process does not require a separate joining process for joining separate components ([0062]).
Regarding claim 17, Hollenbeck further discloses (Figs. 1A-3B) wherein the apparatus is fabricated such that an overhang angle on any downward facing surface of the apparatus is greater than or equal to 25° (see Fig. 2A, no angles meet this definition).
Regarding claim 26, Hollenbeck further discloses (Figs. 1A-3B) wherein one or more of the first multiplexer or the second multiplexer is a quadplexer comprising a first quadplexer branch, a second quadplexer brand, a third quadplexer brand, and a fourth quadplexer branch (see Fig. 2A, [0122]).
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.
Claim(s) 27 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hollenbeck.
Regarding claim 27, Hollenbeck teaches the limitations of claim 1, and further teaches wherein one or more of the first multiplexer or the second multiplexer is a quadplexer comprising a first quadplexer branch, a second quadplexer brand, a third quadplexer brand, and a fourth quadplexer branch, but does not teach a hexaplexer.
Hollenbeck does teach ([0122]) “However, it is to be noted that combiner 1800C may be scaled to any size, such that an array of 128 or 256 or more elements may be simply created by doubling or quadrupling combiner 1800C.”
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to increase the quadplexer of Hollenbeck into a hexaplexer, since it has been held that the simple substitution of one known element for another to obtain predictable results is obvious. KSR International Co. v Teleflex Inc., 550 U.S. 398, 415-421, 82 USPQ2d 1385, 1395-97 (2007) Increasing the number of the combiner branches provides more possible combinations, allowing for more total values for the antenna array.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Bongard et al. (U.S. Patent Application No. 20170077610) teaches an antenna array.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DANIEL MUNOZ whose telephone number is (571)270-1957. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9 a.m. - 5 p.m.
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, Jessica Han can be reached at 571-272-2078. 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.
/DANIEL MUNOZ/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2896