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 .
Claim Objections
Claims 1, 8 and 15 are objected to because of the following informalities:
Claims 1, 8 and 15 respectively reciting “a radome of a conductor with thermal conductivity” should read --a radome made of a conductor with thermal conductivity--.
Appropriate correction is required.
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 1-14 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.
Claim 1 reciting “an antenna apparatus comprising: a substrate; an antenna element…; and a radome…having a slot…, wherein the radome includes a heat radiation fin structure” are indefinite, since it’s unclear how the antenna apparatus is obtained without any ground structure. All embodiments of the invention, require a ground layer.
The spec. discloses, e.g., in the printed publication:
[0044] The antenna apparatus 100 is an antenna array including a plurality of antenna elements, and may be, for example, an AAS. The antenna apparatus 100 includes a large number of antenna elements, and may therefore be referred to as an antenna system. As illustrated in FIGS. 1 to 3, the antenna apparatus 100 includes the substrate 10, a plurality of antenna elements 20, a ground layer 30, a plurality of heat generating components 40, and a radome 50.
[0045] First, a specific configuration of the antenna apparatus 100 will be described with reference to FIG. 3. As illustrated in FIG. 3, the substrate 10 is provided with an electrical wiring pattern, and a plurality of antenna elements 20 are disposed on a first surface of the substrate 10 in a Z-axis positive direction side. Note that, since the first surface faces in a direction of radio wave radiation of the antenna element 20, it may be referred to as a front surface or a top surface, and a second surface of the substrate 10 on an opposite side to the first surface may be referred to as a back surface or a bottom surface. The plurality of antenna elements 20 are disposed away from each other by a predetermined distance in an X-axis direction on the front surface of the substrate 10. Each of the plurality of antenna elements 20 is electrically connected to the ground layer 30 and the radome 50 via a ground line provided on the front surface of the substrate 10.
As such, it appears that a ground layer is critical to the invention, absent which the “antenna apparatus” cannot (be obtained or) operate as its intended purpose, which is, inter alia, to increase heat radiation efficiency while suppressing an increase in size. See, e.g., ¶ [0042] of the printed publication.
Claims 2-7 depend therefrom.
Claim 8 reciting “an antenna apparatus” is indefinite for the same aforementioned reason(s) of claim 1.
Claims 9-14 depend therefrom.
There should be a clear recitation of interrelated structure in order to provide a complete and operable antenna apparatus.
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, 8-10 and 15-17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over “Yoo” (US 20220069476).
Claim 1: As best understood, Yoo discloses an antenna apparatus comprising:
a substrate 111 (Fig. 3);
an antenna element 140 disposed (via 120) on a front surface of the substrate; and
a radome 120, being configured to cover the front surface of the substrate, and having a slot 125 formed at a position facing the antenna element, wherein
the radome includes a heat radiation fin structure 124 (Fig. 6) formed in such a way as to protrude from an outer surface on an opposite side to the substrate side (see Fig. 6), and
the heat radiation fin structure includes at least a heat radiation fin 124 formed in such a way as to surround the slot (see Fig. 6).
Yoo fails to expressly teach the radome of a conductor with thermal conductivity.
However, Yoo teaches in ¶ 49, “The main housing 110 may be designed so that heat generated from heat radiation elements (not illustrated) mounted on the printed circuit board is discharged in a direction in which the multiple heat discharge pins 114 are provided, and may be designed so that heat generated from a PSU mounted on the PSU board 112 is discharged in a direction in which multiple heat discharge pins 124 of the cover housing 120 are provided.”
Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art to design the radome using a conductor with thermal conductivity, in order to efficiently discharge any generated heat.
Claims 2-3: Yoo teaches the antenna apparatus according to claim 1, wherein the heat radiation fin is formed in such a way as to be point symmetrical about a center portion of the slot when viewed from above (see Figs. 3 and 6);
wherein the heat radiation fin is formed in a polygonal shape when viewed from above (see Fig. 3).
Claim 8: As best understood, Yoo discloses an antenna apparatus comprising:
a substrate 111 (Fig. 3);
a plurality of antenna elements 140 disposed (via 120) on a front surface of the substrate; and
a radome 120, being configured to cover the front surface of the substrate, and having a plurality of slots 125 each formed at a position facing each of the plurality of antenna elements (see Figs. 3 and 6), wherein
the radome includes a heat radiation fin structure 124 (Fig. 6) formed in such a way as to protrude from an outer surface on an opposite side to the substrate side, and
the heat radiation fin structure includes at least a plurality of heat radiation fins 124 each formed in such a way as to surround each of the plurality of slots (see Fig. 6).
Yoo fails to expressly teach the radome of a conductor with thermal conductivity.
However, Yoo teaches in ¶ 49, “The main housing 110 may be designed so that heat generated from heat radiation elements (not illustrated) mounted on the printed circuit board is discharged in a direction in which the multiple heat discharge pins 114 are provided, and may be designed so that heat generated from a PSU mounted on the PSU board 112 is discharged in a direction in which multiple heat discharge pins 124 of the cover housing 120 are provided.”
Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art to design the radome using a conductor with thermal conductivity, in order to efficiently discharge any generated heat.
Claims 9-10: Yoo teaches the antenna apparatus according to claim 8, wherein each of the heat radiation fins is formed in such a way as to be point symmetrical about a center portion of the slot associated with the heat radiation fin when viewed from above (see Figs. 3 and 6);
wherein each of the heat radiation fins is formed in a polygonal shape when viewed from above (see Fig. 3).
Claim 15: Yoo discloses a radome 120 (Fig. 3), having a slot 125 formed at a position facing an antenna element 140 in a state of covering a front surface of a substrate 111 on which the antenna element is disposed,
the radome comprising a heat radiation fin structure 124 (Fig. 6) formed in such a way as to protrude from an outer surface on an opposite side to the substrate side (see Figs. 3 and 6),
the heat radiation fin structure including at least a heat radiation fin 124 formed in such a way as to surround the slot (see Fig. 6).
Yoo fails to expressly teach the radome of a conductor with thermal conductivity.
However, Yoo teaches in ¶ 49, “The main housing 110 may be designed so that heat generated from heat radiation elements (not illustrated) mounted on the printed circuit board is discharged in a direction in which the multiple heat discharge pins 114 are provided, and may be designed so that heat generated from a PSU mounted on the PSU board 112 is discharged in a direction in which multiple heat discharge pins 124 of the cover housing 120 are provided.”
Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art to design the radome using a conductor with thermal conductivity, in order to efficiently discharge any generated heat.
Claims 16-17: Yoo teaches the radome according to claim 15, wherein the heat radiation fin is formed in such a way as to be point symmetrical about a center portion of the slot (see Figs. 3 and 6);
wherein the heat radiation fin is formed in a polygonal shape when viewed from above (see Fig. 3).
Claims 4, 11 and 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yoo (cited above) in view of “Kosaka” (US 20200021005).
Claims 4, 11 and 18: Yoo is silent regarding wherein each of the heat radiation fins has one or more slits.
Kosaka discloses each of the heat radiation fins 108 (Figs. 3-4) has one or more slits 108a.
Kosaka teaches in ¶ 69, “in the present invention, considering that the electric field generated by the antenna element and immediately above the reflector plate 101 is perpendicular to the reflector plate 101, in order to separate the conductor in a direction perpendicular to the reflector plate, the radiating fin 108 includes the slit 108a illustrated in FIG. 3. Since the radiating fin 108 partially separated by the slit 108a has a characteristic that an electromagnetic wave having an electric field in a direction parallel to the direction of separation (z-axis direction) may be transmitted, the radiating fin 108 including the slit 108a has a characteristic that a radio wave having an electric field in a direction perpendicular to the reflector plate may be transmitted; as a result, the effect that the radiating fin 108 has on the antenna element may be reduced.”
Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art to modify Yoo’s invention such that each of the heat radiation fins has one or more slits, in order to obtain a characteristic that a radio wave having an electric field in a direction perpendicular to the reflector plate (i.e., substrate) may be transmitted.
Claims 5, 12 and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yoo (cited above) in view of “Sievenpiper” (US 20030174095).
Claims 5, 12 and 19: Yoo is silent regarding wherein each of the slots is formed by intersecting a first opening extending in a first direction and a second opening extending in a second direction different from the first direction.
Sievenpiper discloses each of the slots is formed by intersecting a first opening 16-1 (Fig. 4a) extending in a first direction and a second opening 16-2 extending in a second direction different from the first direction
Sievenpiper teaches in ¶ 21, “The present invention, in yet another aspect, provides a method of receiving circularly polarized radio frequency signals comprising the steps of: (a) providing a slot antenna having two slots which cross each other in a surface of a cavity structure; (d) varying the lengths of the slots so that the slots have different individual resonance frequencies; and (c) providing an antenna feed point on the surface which is spaced from both of the slots.”
Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art to modify Yoo’s invention such that each of the slots is formed by intersecting a first opening extending in a first direction and a second opening extending in a second direction different from the first direction, in order to achieve desired antenna polarization.
Claims 7 and 14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yoo (cited above) in view of “Gottl” (US 10879602).
Claims 7 and 14: Yoo fails to expressly teach wherein the radome further includes a wall portion protruding from a surface on the substrate side to a front surface of the substrate.
Gottl discloses wherein the radome 5 (Fig. 2) further includes a wall portion 10 protruding from a surface on the substrate 3 side to a front surface of the substrate.
Gottl teaches “The radiators, radiator elements or radiator groups are accommodated protected under a radome 5, the radome 5 typically being manufactured as a one-part body which is closed in the peripheral direction and comprises a somewhat convexly curved front side 7, side wall portions 10 and a typically rather flat rear side 9.” (Col. 6, ll. 60-65)
Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art to modify Yoo’s invention such that the radome further includes a wall portion protruding from a surface on the substrate side to a front surface of the substrate, in order to robustly protect each of the antenna elements.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 6 and 13 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.
Claim 20 is 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.
Seo (US 7245896)
Toyao (US 20180358710)
Kim (US 20230327345)
Peng (US 8781409)
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to HASAN ISLAM whose telephone number is (571)270-1719. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Thu 9AM-7PM EST.
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, DAMEON LEVI can be reached at (571)272-2105. 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.
/HASAN ISLAM/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2845
Prosecution Insights