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 .
Restriction / Election
Applicant elects Species I (Claims 1-16) without traverse on 12/22/2025.
Claim Rejections – 35 U.S.C. 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 1-16 are 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.
Regarding Claims 1-5, all the terms “approximately” render uncertainty to the claimed invention.
Claims 2-16 are also vague by virtue of their dependency on Claim 1.
Claim Rejections – 35 U.S.C. 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) 1 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Cao et al. (2015/0372362) in view of Carlson et al. (4,521,755).
Regarding Claim 1, Cao et al. (2015/0372362) discloses a phase delaying device (phase shift, paragraph [0041]) configured to provide a frequency dependent phase delay within a frequency range (phase delay of radio frequency, paragraph [0041]), the phase delaying device comprising:
at least two consecutive inner conductors (“first conductor and second conductor disposed side by side into the interlayer space”, abstract) and an outer conductor (“third conductor located outside of the interlayer space and connected”, abstract), the inner conductors being arranged to co-act (first and second conductor co-act with third conductor) with the outer conductor such as to form a transmission line (feeding network, abstract),
wherein a first (41) and a second (42) inner conductor (fig. 3) are arranged with a longitudinal overlap between a connecting portion (41 and 42 connected) of the first inner conductor (41) and a corresponding connecting portion of the second inner conductor (42) such as to electrically couple the inner conductors (fig. 3),
wherein the connecting portions are spaced apart with separating material therebetween, the separating material selected from air, dielectric material (6 or 6’) (figs. 3-5), or a combination of air and dielectric material,
As discussed above, Cao essentially discloses the claimed invention but does not explicitly disclose wherein said longitudinal overlap has a length of approximately λе/4, where λe is a wavelength in said separating material at a frequency within said frequency range.
However, Carlson et al. (4,521,755) discloses that longitudinal overlap (“a triangular cross-section and extending longitudinally”) has a length of approximately λe/4 (“one-quarter”), where λe is a wavelength in said separating material (“dielectric material”) at a frequency within said frequency range (“frequency of operation”) (Col. 7, lines 65 to Col. 8, line 8).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to have provided the ¼ wavelength in the dielectric material in the frequency range in Cao in order to minimize or reduce transmission and circuit losses as taught by Carlson (Col. 1, lines 31-40).
Allowable subject matter
Claims 2-16 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.
Correspondence
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Examiner Wilson Lee whose telephone number is (571) 272-1824. Proposed amendment and interview agenda can be submitted to Examiner’s direct fax at (571) 273-1824.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, examiner’s supervisor, Alexander Taningco can be reached at (571) 272-8048. Papers related to the application may be submitted by facsimile transmission. Any transmission not to be considered an official response must be clearly marked "DRAFT". The official fax number is (571) 273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Center. Status information for published applications may be obtained from Patent Center. For more information about the Patent Center, see https://patentcenter.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Patent Center, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free).
/WILSON LEE/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2844