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 Amendment
The amendment filed July 16, 2026 has been entered.
Claims 1,2, 5-14, 16, 17 and 38-40 remain pending in the application.
Specification
The disclosure is objected to because of the following informalities:
In the first line of paragraph [0064], “central opening12” should read “central opening 12”.
The specification is objected to as failing to provide proper antecedent basis for the claimed subject matter. See 37 CFR 1.75(d)(1) and MPEP § 608.01(o). Correction of the following is required: Regarding claim 1, and the recitations therein of, “a first monolithic sheet metal member” , “a second monolithic sheet metal member” “a third monolithic sheet metal member”, “a fourth monolithic sheet metal member”.
While the Specification does recite “a single sheet metal member” the abovementioned limitations as recited are not present in the Specification, and therefore lack antecedent basis.
Regarding claim 2, and the recitation of “a fifth square” these limitations are not present in the Specification, and therefore lack antecedent basis.
Regarding claim 40, and the recitations therein of, “a first single monolithic sheet metal member” , “a second single monolithic sheet metal member” “a third single monolithic sheet metal member”, “a fourth single monolithic sheet metal member”. While the Specification does recite “a single sheet metal member”, the abovementioned limitations as recited are not present in the Specification, and therefore lack antecedent basis.
Drawings
The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims.
Therefore as claimed in claim 1, “a first monolithic sheet metal member” , “a second monolithic sheet metal member” “a third monolithic sheet metal member”, “a fourth monolithic sheet metal member”. ,
As claimed in claim 40, “a first single monolithic sheet metal member” , “a second single monolithic sheet metal member” “a third single monolithic sheet metal member”, “a fourth single monolithic sheet metal member”. While the Specification does recite “a single sheet metal member” must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s).
No new matter should be entered.
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) 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. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. 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.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112:
The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention.
Claims 38-40 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention.
Regarding claim 38, and the recitations therein of, “wherein the first hook-shaped balun comprises a first metal segment that extends adjacent the first stalk portion in a direction perpendicular to fifth square, a third metal segment that extends adjacent the second stalk portion in a direction perpendicular to the fifth square and a second metal segment that connects the first metal segment to the third metal segment, where the first and third metal segments are in between the first and second stalk portions, wherein the second hook-shaped balun comprises a fourth metal segment that extends adjacent the third stalk portion in a direction perpendicular to the fifth square, a sixth metal segment that extends adjacent the fourth stalk portion in a direction perpendicular to the fifth square and a fifth metal segment that connects the fourth metal segment to the sixth metal segment, where the fourth and sixth metal segments are in between the third and fourth stalk portions”
While there is no in haec verba requirement, it is asserted that, the examiner, upon examining the disclosure extensively, determines that these recitations and limitations are not disclosed in the original disclosure in such a way that would be apparent that Applicant, at the time the invention was filed, had possession of the claimed invention.
Claims 39 and 40 depend therefrom.
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.
Claim 1 recites the limitations " a plurality of inwardly-extending narrow sections that includes a least four inwardly-extending narrow sections”. It is unclear if these at least four inwardly extending narrow sections are the same inwardly extending narrow sections, or, different inwardly extending narrow sections, or a part of the plurality of inwardly extending narrow sections. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claims 2, 5-14, 16 and 17 depend therefrom and inherit the deficiencies.
For purposes of examination, the prior art rejections below are construed and applied as best understood.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(d):
(d) REFERENCE IN DEPENDENT FORMS.—Subject to subsection (e), a claim in dependent form shall contain a reference to a claim previously set forth and then specify a further limitation of the subject matter claimed. A claim in dependent form shall be construed to incorporate by reference all the limitations of the claim to which it refers.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, fourth paragraph:
Subject to the following paragraph [i.e., the fifth paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112], a claim in dependent form shall contain a reference to a claim previously set forth and then specify a further limitation of the subject matter claimed. A claim in dependent form shall be construed to incorporate by reference all the limitations of the claim to which it refers.
Claim 16 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(d) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, 4th paragraph, as being of
improper dependent form for failing to further limit the subject matter of the claim upon which it
depends, or for failing to include all the limitations of the claim upon which it depends.
Claim 16 recites “The radiator assembly according to Claim 15, wherein the fifth protrusion extends along a diagonal of the first square.”
However, claim 15 is cancelled.
Thus claim 16 is not written so as to entirely encompass the limitations of any claim, therefore fails to include all the limitations of the claim upon which it depends. Applicant may cancel the claim(s), amend the claim(s) to place the claim(s) in proper dependent form, rewrite the claim(s) in independent form, or present a sufficient showing that the dependent claim(s) complies with the statutory requirement.
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) 1,2, 5-14, 16, 17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wang et al CN 212571352 in view of Sun et al US PGPUB 20230361475 A1.
Regarding claim 1, as best understood, Wang et al teaches (Fig. 1-2) A dual-polarized radiator assembly (100) for base station
antennas, comprising: a first dipole(11) and a second dipole(11) that is orthogonal to the first dipole (11), the first dipole including a first dipole arm that includes a first radiating portion that has a first outer contour that defines a first square(see square contour, Figs 1,2) and a first stalk portion(20) that that extends orthogonally to the first radiating portion, and a second dipole arm that includes a second radiating portion that has a second outer contour that defines a second square(see square contour, Figs 1,2) and a second stalk portion(20) that extends orthogonally to the second radiating portion, and the second dipole including a third dipole arm that includes a third radiating portion that has a third outer contour that defines a third square(see square contour, Figs 1,2) and a third stalk portion(20) that extends orthogonally to the third radiating portion, and a fourth dipole arm that includes a fourth radiating portion that has a fourth outer contour that defines a fourth square (see square contour, Figs 1,2) and a fourth stalk portion(20) that extends orthogonally to the fourth radiating portion wherein each of the first radiating portion, the second radiating portion, the third radiating portion and the fourth radiating portion includes a plurality of wide sections(12) that are interconnected by at least a plurality of inwardly-extending narrow sections(13) that includes a least four inwardly-extending narrow sections(13),
Although Wang et al does not explicitly teach wherein the first radiating portion and the first stalk portion are a first monolithic sheet metal member, the second radiating portion and the second stalk portion are a second monolithic sheet metal member, the third radiating portion and the third stalk portion are a third monolithic sheet metal member, and the fourth radiating portion and the fourth stalk portion are a fourth monolithic sheet metal member, Wang et al does teach that the radiating portions and stalk portions are formed of sheet metal(Wang et al “the annular radiating arm 11 is preferably composed of a metal strip; the metal strip is preferably a metal copper foil;” “Balun 20 is composed of two orthogonal combination of the circuit board, the circuit board preferably adopts the PCB circuit board. each circuit board comprises a second dielectric plate 21, the second dielectric plate 21 is distributed on the front surface of the feeding line 22, the second dielectric plate 21 is covered with a second metal layer 23. The feed line 22 is coupled to the second metal layer 23. the bottom of the second metal layer 23 is connected with the bottom plate 30; the top part of the second metal layer 23 is connected with the radiator 10 feeding. The feed line 22 is preferably realized by a metal copper foil, such as a metal copper foil, and the second metal layer 23 is preferably made of a metal copper foil.”).
However, Sun et al teaches an antenna assembly(Fig 3A) wherein the first radiating portion(32a) and the first stalk portion (40a)are a first monolithic sheet metal member(para. 0012, 0038), the second radiating portion(32b)and the second stalk portion(40b) are a second monolithic sheet metal member(para 0012, 0038), the third radiating portion (32c)and the third stalk portion(40c) are a third monolithic sheet metal member(para. 0012, 0038), and the fourth radiating portion(32d) and the fourth stalk portion(40d) are a fourth monolithic sheet metal member(para. 0012, 0038)
It would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person
having ordinary skill in the art to provide the radiator portions and stalk portions of Wang et al as monolithic sheet metal members as taught by Sun et al to facilitate ease of manufacturing the antenna assembly by stamping a single contiguous piece of metal(Sun para 0012).
Regarding claim 2, Wang et al teaches wherein as a whole, the first radiating portion, the second radiating portion, the third radiating portion and the fourth radiating portion have an outer contour that collectively form defines a fifth square(see outer contour of 10 Figs 1,2).
Regarding claim 5, Wang et al teaches wherein every two adjacent wide sections in the plurality of wide sections(12) of the first radiating portion are connected through a respective one of the plurality of inwardly-extending narrow sections(13) of the first radiating portion.
Regarding claim 6, Wang et al teaches wherein each inwardly-extending narrow section of the plurality of inwardly-extending narrow sections of the first radiating portion is bent in a zigzag shape to form a protrusion(13).
Regarding claim 7, Wang et al teaches wherein a first wide section in the plurality of wide sections of the first radiating portion is angularly constructed, forming a part of each of first inner side and a second inner side of the first square and a first corner of the first square that is an inner corner of the first square(see inner corner 13, 11, Figs 1,2).
Regarding claim 8, Wang et al teaches wherein a second wide section in the plurality of wide sections of the first radiating portion is angularly constructed, forming a part of the first inner side of the first square, a part of a first outer side of the first square, and a second corner of the first square, and a third wide section in the plurality of wide sections of the first radiating portion is angularly constructed, forming a part of the second inner side of the first square and a part of the second outer side of the first square and a third corner of the first square(see arrangement of elements 13 in the squares 11 respectively, Figs 1,2).
Regarding claim 9, Wang et al teaches wherein a fourth wide section in the plurality of wide sections of the first radiating portion extends in a first straight line forming a part of a first outer side of the first square and a fifth wide section in the plurality of wide sections of the first radiating portion extends in a second straight line forming a part of a second outer side of the first square, and the fourth wide section and the fifth wide section together forming a fourth corner of the first square that is an outer corner of the first square(see arrangement of elements 13 in the squares 11 respectively, Figs 1,2).
Regarding claim 10, Wang et al teaches wherein a first of the inwardly-extending narrow sections in the plurality of inwardly-extending narrow sections is part of a first inner side of the first square and forms a first protrusion that extends from the first inner side of the first square to the inside of the first square, and a second of the inwardly-extending narrow sections in the plurality of inwardly-extending narrow sections is part of a second inner side of the first square and forms a second protrusion that extends from the second inner side of the first square to the inside of the first square(see arrangement of elements 12 in the squares 11 respectively, Figs 1,2).
Regarding claim 11 Wang et al does not explicitly teach wherein respective longitudinal axes of the first protrusion and the second protrusion are colinear.
Sun et al teaches teach wherein respective longitudinal axes of the first protrusion and the second protrusion are colinear(see Fig 3A).
It would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person
having ordinary skill in the art to modify the radiator assembly of Wang to include
wherein respective longitudinal axes of the first and second protrusions are colinear , as taught by
Sun et al, for the purpose of achieving a desired capacitance.
Regarding claim 12, Wang et al teaches wherein a third of the inwardly-extending narrow sections in the plurality of inwardly-extending narrow sections is part of a first outer side of the first square and forms a third protrusion that extends from the first outer side of the first square to the inside of the first square, and a fourth of the inwardly-extending narrow sections in the plurality of inwardly-extending narrow sections is part of a second outer side of the first square and forms a fourth protrusion that extends from the second outer side of the first square to the inside of the first square(see arrangement of elements 12 in the squares 11 respectively, Figs 1,2).
Regarding claim 13 Wang et al does not explicitly teach wherein respective longitudinal axes of the third protrusion and the fourth protrusion are colinear.
Sun et al teaches teach wherein respective longitudinal axes of the third protrusion and the fourth protrusion are colinear(see Fig 3A).
It would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person
having ordinary skill in the art to modify the radiator assembly of Wang to include
wherein respective longitudinal axes of the third and fourth protrusions are colinear , as taught by
Sun et al, for the purpose of achieving a desired capacitance.
Regarding claim 14, Wang et al teaches wherein a first outer side and a second outer side of the first square are connected to each other through a fifth of the inwardly-extending narrow sections in the plurality of inwardly-extending narrow sections that forms a fifth protrusion that extends from an outer corner of the first square to the inside of the first square(see elements 13, 12,Figs 1,2).
Regarding claim 16, Wang et al teaches wherein the fifth protrusion extends along a diagonal of the first square(see elements 13, 12,Figs 1,2).
Regarding claim 17, Wang et al teaches wherein the first outer side and the second outer side of the first square are connected to each other through a fifth of the inwardly-extending narrow sections in the plurality of inwardly-extending narrow sections that forms a fifth protrusion that extends from an outer corner of the first square to the inside of the first square and a free end of the fifth protrusion is between free ends of the third protrusion and the fourth protrusion(see arrangement of elements 13 respectively, Figs 1,2).
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1-17, 20, 38 and 39 have been considered but are moot because the new grounds of rejection does not rely on the combination of references applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Applicants are directed to additional pertinent prior art listed on the PTOL 892 Notice of References cited, attached herewith.
The Examiner has pointed out particular references contained in the prior art of record within the
body of this action for the convenience of the Applicant. Although the specified citations are representative of the teachings in the art and are applied to the specific limitations within the individual claim, other passages and figures may apply. Applicant, in preparing the response, should consider fully the entire reference as potentially teaching all or part of the claimed invention, as well as the context of the passage as taught by the prior art or disclosed by the Examiner.
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DAMEON E LEVI whose telephone number is (571)272-2105. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 9AM-6PM.
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 Wellington can be reached at (571) 272-4483. 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.
DAMEON E. LEVI
Supervisory Patent Examiner
Art Unit 2845
/DAMEON E LEVI/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2845
Prosecution Insights