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
NPL 3 and 11 in both the IDS filed on 1/31/2025 and 2/05/2025 do not include the date necessary. Applicant is asked to add the retrieval date or to inform the examiner what each retrieval date is so that this may be corrected.
Drawings
The drawings are objected to as failing to comply with 37 CFR 1.84(p)(5) because they include the following reference character(s) not mentioned in the description:
Reference labels coax port 1-8, as shown in Figure 9 need to be corresponding described in the specification description of Figure 9.
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d), or amendment to the specification to add the reference character(s) in the description in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(b) 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. 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.
Specification
The disclosure is objected to because of the following informalities:
Coax port 1-8 (Figure 9) is not mentioned or defined within the specification description and thus is not commensurate with what is depicted and labeled in the drawings (Figure 9).
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Objections
Claims 13-20 are objected to because of the following informalities:
Claim 13, Line 9 and Claim 17, Line 12, “the a second microstrip line” should be rewritten as – the microstrip line --.
Claims 14-16 and 18-20 depend upon objected claims 13 and 17 and inherit the deficiency thereby.
Appropriate correction is required.
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 17 are provisionally rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 17-18 of copending Application No. 18/750,732 (reference application), a reference as cited by the applicant. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because
Application Claim Number
Copending Application 18/750,732 Claim Number
Application Limitation
Copending Application 18/750,732 Limitation
17
17
A non-transitory machine-readable medium, comprising executable instructions that, when executed by at least one processor, facilitate performance of operations
“A non-transitory machine-readable medium, comprising executable instructions that, when executed by at least one processor, facilitate performance of operations”
17
17
obtaining crossover coupler input parameters comprising defined bandwidth data representative of a defined bandwidth, and defined center frequency data representative of a defined center frequency
“obtaining crossover coupler input parameters comprising a defined bandwidth”, which is inherently related to defined bandwidth data, “and a defined center frequency”, the defined center frequency inherently having defined center frequency data
17
17
determining design parameters for a crossover coupler that satisfy the crossover coupler input parameters
“determining design parameters for a crossover coupler that satisfies the input parameters”
17
17
the crossover coupler comprising: a single top metallization layer, comprising: a first pair of opposite ports coupled together by a first microstrip line, a second pair of opposite ports coupled together by a second microstrip line
“the crossover coupler comprising: a single top metallization layer, comprising: a first pair of opposite ports coupled together by a first microstrip line, a second pair of opposite ports coupled together by a second microstrip line”
17
17
the first microstrip line and the a second microstrip line form a cross-shaped pattern that intersects at an intersection point
“the first microstrip line and the a second microstrip line form a cross-shaped pattern that intersects at an intersection point”
17
17 and 18
four respective inner partial couplers substantially symmetrically distributed around the intersection point, and a gapped outer ring comprising four respective gaps
“four inner partial couplers substantially symmetrically distributed around the intersection point, and an outer ring that surrounds the four inner partial couplers and is substantially centered at the intersection point” (claim 17) and “a gap distance between the partial couplers and the outer ring” (claim 18), therefore there the outer ring is inherently gapped and has four respective gaps according to each inner partial coupler
17
17
the gapped outer ring comprising four respective radial sections substantially centered at the intersection point and surrounding the four respective inner partial couplers
“and an outer ring that surrounds the four inner partial couplers and is substantially centered at the intersection point”, four respective radial sections would inherently be formed if the outer ring is surrounding the four inner partial couplers and centered at the intersection point, as is known to one of ordinary skill in the art
17
17
the determining of the design parameters comprises: determining a defined size of an area encompassing the outer gapped ring to establish the defined center frequency of the crossover coupler, and determining respective gap widths of the four respective gaps to establish the defined bandwidth
“determining of the design parameters comprises determining a defined size of an area encompassing the outer ring to establish the defined center frequency of the crossover coupler, and determining at least one of: a width of the outer ring, or a gap distance between adjacent pairs of the inner partial couplers, to establish the defined bandwidth”, by determining both the widths and gap distances, this would inherently determine the respective gap widths
17
17
configuring the crossover coupler to be implemented, comprising configuring the crossover coupler based on the design parameters
“configuring the crossover coupler to be implemented, comprising configuring the crossover coupler based on the design parameters”
This is a provisional nonstatutory double patenting rejection because the patentably indistinct claims have not in fact been patented.
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.
Claims 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 the limitation "the first slot opening" in Line 3. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 2 recites the limitation "the second slot opening" in Lines 3-4. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Appropriate correction is required.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 1 and 3-12 are allowable over the prior art of record, since the closest prior art of record to Roederer (US 5237294), while teaching a coupler including two microstrip lines, a ring, and multiple ports, fails to teach or suggest the four inner partial couplers as recited in independent claim 1.
Claims 18-20 are 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.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
The most pertinent prior art is Roederer (US 5237294) which teaches a coupler including two microstrip lines, a ring, and multiple ports.
Kuo (US 20110309894) is also a pertinent prior art which teaches a crossover coupler including the four ports.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ABIGAIL YALDO whose telephone number is (703)756-1784. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 7 AM - 4 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, Andrea Lindgren Baltzell can be reached at (571) 272-5918. 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.
/ABIGAIL AMIR YALDO/Examiner, Art Unit 2843
/ANDREA LINDGREN BALTZELL/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2843