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 Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 05/19/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Regarding claims 1 & 9, in response to applicants arguments that Mohajer-Iravani et al. (US 2010/0188171 A1), hereinafter Ira, does not disclose the second coupling rod or any additional elements of the coupling structure besides for the first coupling rod, this is not persuasive because one cannot show nonobviousness by attacking references individually where the rejections are based on combinations of references. See In re Keller, 642 F.2d 413, 208 USPQ 871 (CCPA 1981); In re Merck & Co., 800 F.2d 1091, 231 USPQ 375 (Fed. Cir. 1986). Kim et al. (US 10,777,869 B2), hereinafter Kim, discloses the first and second coupling rods of the coupling structure.
Further, Ira discloses, in figure 12, the coupling structure, 1208, including main coupling sections 1204 formed by wall sections 1206 & a separate rod 1201, that “determines the coupling value” (Para [0066]) between adjacent resonators 1200 & 1202 of the coupling structure 1208. Each coupling section, in combination, form the coupling structure 1208. Thus, the combination of Ira, Kim, and Tiihonen (US 2012/0007697 A1) disclose the coupling structure, as required by the claims.
In response to applicants arguments that Ira does not disclose that a resonant frequency of the coupling structure is greater than a resonant frequency of the first coupling rod, this is not persuasive because Ira discloses, in figure 12, that the resonant frequency follows the “same trend as the coupling, so a stronger coupling results in a higher resonant frequency” (Para [0043]). Each coupling section, in combination, to form the coupling structure 1208 would result in a “greater range of coupling values between the resonators” (Para [0066]) and, additionally, a greater resonant frequency than just a single coupling rod section 1201 between adjacent resonators 1200 & 1202 of the coupling structure.
Further, by broadest reasonable interpretation, the claims disclose the resonators as a part of the coupling structure with the coupling established between the first coupling rod and the adjacent cavity filters. Therefore, the resonators and their associated resonant frequencies are directly applicable to the resonant frequency of the coupling structure. Ira discloses the relationship between the coupling values and the resonant frequency of the coupling structure 1208 when coupled to resonators 1200 & 1202, as discussed above. Thus, a resonant frequency of the coupling structure is greater than a resonant frequency of the first coupling rod is disclosed, as required by the invention as claimed.
Finally, in response to applicants arguments that Tiihonen does not disclose both ends of the second coupling rod being grounded to increase a resonant frequency of the coupling structure, this is not persuasive because a recitation of the intended use of the claimed invention must result in a structural difference between the claimed invention and the prior art in order to patentably distinguish the claimed invention from the prior art. If the prior art structure is capable of performing the intended use, then it meets the claim. Tiihonen discloses, in figure 2, that the second coupling rod 215 is “grounded from its ends” (Para [0026]) to adjust the coupling strength between the resonators. Thus, Tiihonen is capable of adjusting the resonant frequency of the coupling structure, as required by the invention as claimed.
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 1-7 & 9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kim et al. (US 10,777,869 B2), hereinafter Kim, in view of Mohajer-Iravani et al. (US 2010/0188171 A1), hereinafter Ira, and further in view of Tiihonen (US 2012/0007697 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Kim discloses, in figure 2 & 4A, a coupling structure for cavity filters, the coupling structure comprising:
a first coupling rod (coupling rod 51), both ends of the first coupling rod being coupled to resonators of two adjacent cavity filters (coupling rod 51 is coupled to cavity filters of resonant elements 34 and 36, respectively), respectively; and
a second coupling rod (coupling tuning rod 61), the second coupling rod being cross-coupled to the first coupling rod (Col. 6 & 8, Lines 55-58 & 57-58, “notch substrate 51 is installed for a cross-coupling between the fourth resonant element 34 and the sixth resonant element 36…notch tuning pin 61 is installed to be insertable into the tuning hole structure 51b formed at the notch substrate 51”), but fails to disclose both ends of the second coupling rod being grounded to increase a resonant frequency of the coupling structure, and wherein the resonant frequency of the coupling structure is greater than a resonant frequency of the first coupling rod.
However, Ira discloses, in figure 1 & 12, and the resonant frequency of the coupling structure is greater than a resonant frequency of the first coupling rod (Para [0043], “the resonant frequency for resonators coupled using the coupling device 100 [1208] can be significantly higher than the resonant frequency of each individual resonator 102 [1200], 104 [1202]…the resonant frequency follows the same trend as the coupling, so a stronger coupling results in a higher resonant frequency”…i.e., the stronger coupling of the coupling rod 1201 and iris 1204 between resonators 1200 & 1202 of the coupling structure 1208 in combination results in a higher resonant frequency for the coupling structure 1208).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to include the resonant frequency characteristics of Ira in the coupling structure Kim, to achieve the benefit of implementing a coupling structure with strong inter-resonator coupling for the realization of wideband electrical components (Ira, Para [0043]).
In combination, Kim and Ira fail to disclose both ends of the second coupling rod being grounded to increase a resonant frequency of the coupling structure.
However, Tiihonen discloses, in figure 2, both ends of the second coupling rod being grounded to increase a resonant frequency of the coupling structure (Para [0026], “tuning element [215] is grounded from its ends”…to adjust a coupling strength between the resonators that adjusts a resonant frequency of the coupling structure 215, 218 in combination with adjacent resonator cavities. If the prior art structure is capable of performing the intended use, then it meets the claim).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to include the grounding of Tiihonen in the second coupling rod of Kim and Ira, to achieve the benefit of effectively adjusting the coupling between the resonators of the coupling structure (Tiihonen, Para [0026]).
Regarding claim 2, Kim, Ira, and Tiihonen disclose the coupling structure of claim 1, and Kim continues to disclose, in figure 2 & 4A, wherein the second coupling rod forms a cross coupling in the first coupling rod (Col. 6 & 8, Lines 55-58 & 57-58, “notch substrate 51 is installed for a cross-coupling between the fourth resonant element 34 and the sixth resonant element 36…notch tuning pin 61 is installed to be insertable into the tuning hole structure 51b formed at the notch substrate 51”).
Regarding claim 3, Kim, Ira, and Tiihonen disclose the coupling structure of claim 2, and Kim continues to disclose, in figure 2 & 4A, wherein the first coupling rod comprises:
a first coupling body (coupling body extending to resonator portions and consisting of through holes 51a and 51c); and
a second coupling portion (middle coupling portion comprising through hole 51b), the second coupling portion being formed in the middle of the first coupling body (second coupling portion is formed in the middle, see figure 4A), wherein the second coupling portion includes a through hole therethrough (through hole 51b) and wherein the second coupling rod passes through the through hole and being perpendicular to the first coupling body (Col. 8, Lines 57-58, “notch tuning pin 61 is installed to be insertable into the tuning hole structure 51b formed at the notch substrate 51”…and perpendicular to the first coupling body).
Regarding claim 4, Kim, Ira, and Tiihonen disclose the coupling structure of claim 2, and Ira continues to disclose, in figure 12, wherein the resonant frequency of the coupling structure is related to a length of the second coupling rod (Para [0093], “The coupling and resonant frequency decrease by increasing the length of the coupling device”).
Regarding claim 6, Kim, Ira, and Tiihonen disclose the coupling structure of claim 3, and Kim continues to disclose, in figure 2 & 3A, wherein a cross-sectional shape of the second coupling rod is the same as or different from a shape of the through hole (cross-sectional shape of the second coupling rod is slightly different from a shape of the through hole 51b, see figure 3A).
Regarding claim 7, Kim, Ira, and Tiihonen disclose the coupling structure of claim 3, and Kim continues to disclose, in figure 2 & 4A, wherein an outer edge of the second coupling portion protrudes from an edge of the first coupling body (outer edge of the second coupling portion constituting the through hole 51b protrudes from an edge of the first coupling body constituting through holes 51a and 51c).
Regarding claim 9, Kim discloses, in figure 2, 4A, & 10, a filtering device, comprising:
a plurality of cavity filters (Col. 5, Lines 29-31, “Each cavity of the housing 20 has a resonant element 32…34…36…at a central position of each cavity”); and
a coupling structure (51 & 61) including:
a first coupling rod (coupling rod 51), both ends of the first coupling rod being coupled to resonators of two adjacent cavity filters (coupling rod 51 is coupled to cavity filters of resonant elements 34 and 36, respectively), respectively; and
a second coupling rod (coupling tuning rod 61), the second coupling rod being cross-coupled to the first coupling rod (Col. 6 & 8, Lines 55-58 & 57-58, “notch substrate 51 is installed for a cross-coupling between the fourth resonant element 34 and the sixth resonant element 36…notch tuning pin 61 is installed to be insertable into the tuning hole structure 51b formed at the notch substrate 51”),
wherein each cavity filter has a coupling window connected with an adjacent cavity filter (figure 10 discloses the cavity filters with resonating elements 32, 34, &36 depicted with a coupling window connected with an adjacent cavity filter), and the coupling structure is mounted to the coupling window to couple two adjacent cavity filters (Col. 6, Lines 57-61, “a window having a shape from which an appropriate portion is removed to allow a notch substrate 51 to be installed is formed at the partition wall 204 for separating the cavity of the fourth resonant element 34 from that of the sixth resonant element 36”), but fails to disclose both ends of the second coupling rod being grounded to increase a resonant frequency of the coupling structure, and wherein the resonant frequency of the coupling structure is greater than a resonant frequency of the first coupling rod.
However, Ira discloses, in figure 1 & 12, wherein the resonant frequency of the coupling structure is greater than a resonant frequency of the first coupling rod (Para [0043], “the resonant frequency for resonators coupled using the coupling device 100 [1208] can be significantly higher than the resonant frequency of each individual resonator 102 [1200], 104 [1202]…the resonant frequency follows the same trend as the coupling, so a stronger coupling results in a higher resonant frequency”…i.e., the stronger coupling of the coupling rod 1201 and iris 1204 between resonators 1200 & 1202 of the coupling structure 1208 in combination results in a higher resonant frequency for the coupling structure 1208).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to include the resonant frequency characteristics of Ira in the coupling structure Kim, to achieve the benefit of implementing a coupling structure with strong inter-resonator coupling for the realization of wideband electrical components (Ira, Para [0043]).
In combination, Kim and Ira fail to disclose both ends of the second coupling rod being grounded to increase a resonant frequency of the coupling structure.
However, Tiihonen discloses, in figure 2, both ends of the second coupling rod being grounded to increase a resonant frequency of the coupling structure (Para [0026], “tuning element [215] is grounded from its ends”…to adjust a coupling strength between the resonators that adjusts a resonant frequency of the coupling structure 215, 218 in combination with adjacent resonator cavities. If the prior art structure is capable of performing the intended use, then it meets the claim).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to include the grounding of Tiihonen in the second coupling rod of Kim and Ira, to achieve the benefit of effectively adjusting the coupling between the resonators of the coupling structure (Tiihonen, Para [0026]).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 8 & 10-12 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.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Zheng et al. (US 11,239,536 B2) [Figure 2. Discloses a coupling rib assembly between every two resonant cavities of the at least two resonant cavities. The coupling rib assembly includes a first coupling rib and a second coupling rib, where the first coupling rib is connected to the resonant cavity wall and the resonant cavity bottom plate to block two adjacent resonant cavities from each other, and the second coupling rib is connected to the resonant cavity bottom plate and intersects with the first coupling rib.]
Bentivenga (US 5,262,742) [Figure 4. Discloses a capacitive cross-coupling fine tuned by a tuning rod that is positioned through the inner wall and within the aperture. The half-wave resonator rod can be either a shunt half-wave resonator rod or a series half-wave resonator rod, whereby the shunt half-wave resonator rod is fine tuned by a tuning disc and the series half-wave resonator rod is fine tuned by a pair of tuning rods.]
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to TYLER J PERENY whose telephone number is (571)272-4189. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 7:30-5.
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, Taelor Kim can be reached at (571) 270-7166. 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.
/TYLER J PERENY/Examiner, Art Unit 2836
Prosecution Insights