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 4 and 7-9 are objected to because of the following informalities:
Claim 4, Line 3 and Claim 7, Line 2, “the resonant element” should read --the one-piece resonant element--.
Claims 8-9 depend upon objected to claim 7 and inherit the deficiency thereby.
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 13-14 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 13, Line 3, “basically the same shape” is unclear to one of ordinary skill in the art as to what the term “basically” fully encompasses and how similar in shape the first and second resonant elements essentially are, therefore leaving the metes and bounds of the claim unclear.
Claim 14, Line 3, “basically one and the same plane” is unclear to one of ordinary skill in the art as to what the term “basically” fully encompasses and whether the first and second resonant elements are actually placed in the same plane or a different one, therefore leaving the metes and bounds of the claim unclear.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1-4, 7, and 10-11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Li (US 11973255).
As per Claim 1:
Li discloses in Figure 12:
A one-piece resonant element (“resonant structure”, 1, as shown in related Figure 1) for a filter (“resonant structure of the filter”, [Col. 3, Line 30]), comprising:
a main body (“resonator”, 12b and 12e) which comprises an elongate middle part (“resonant middle portion” 122, as is shown in related Figure 1 and evident by the middle portion as shown in figure 12 and shown below in annotated Image 1)
and resonant end parts (“resonant head”, 121 and “resonant tail”, 123, as shown in related Figure 1 and annotated by the circled in portions of Image 1 below) provided on both ends of the middle part (“middle portion”, 122, while the numerical designation is not depicted, it is evident that the portions are within the resonator 12 of Figure 12, “each resonator 12 has a cylindrical structure as a whole, and specifically includes a resonant head 121, a resonant middle portion 122, and a resonant tail 123”, [Col. 5, Lines 29-32])
wherein the one-piece resonant element further comprises a cross-coupling arm (C1, as shown in annotated Image 2 below from related Figure 9) extending integrally from the middle part (the arm C1 is extending from the resonant middle portion 122, as shown in Figure 12 and related Figure 9) and configured for creating inductive or capacitive cross-coupling with a resonator (the resonator 12e is passed between the resonator 12f, [Col. 14, Lines 26-31], [Col. 14, Lines 55-60]) is located on a signal transmission path of the filter (the resonators are arranged in the signal transmission path, [Col. 14, Lines 26-29]).
PNG
media_image1.png
181
303
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Image 1
PNG
media_image2.png
180
319
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Image 2
As per Claim 2:
Li discloses in Figure 12:
The one-piece resonant element (“resonant structure”, 1) according to claim 1, characterized in that the main body (“resonator”, 12) of the one-piece resonant element is substantially flat (as is evident by the planar nature of the resonators in related Figures 8 and 9).
As per Claims 3 and 7:
Li discloses in Figure 12:
The one-piece resonant element (“resonant structure”, 1) according to claim 2, characterized in that the resonant end parts (“resonant head”, 121 and “resonant tail”, 123, as shown in related Figure 1) of the resonant element (1) each comprise a widened portion (as per claim 7) or each have a thickness greater than or equal to a thickness of the middle part (as per claim 3) relative to the middle part (“the width of the resonant head 121 is designed to be wider than the widths of the resonant middle portion 122”, [Col. 5, Lines 36-40] and 123 is widened and thicker in comparison to the middle part 122 as is evident by the middle portion of the resonators 12b and 12e being less wide than the ends of the resonators in Figure 12).
As per Claim 4:
Li discloses in Figure 12:
The one-piece resonant element (“resonant structure”, 1) according to claim 2, characterized in that the cross-coupling arm (C1, as shown in Image 2 above) extends from a widthwise end side of the middle part (C1 extends from the widthwise end of 122 of resonator 12b and 12e, as shown by the boxed in portion of Image 3 below) of the resonant element.
PNG
media_image3.png
303
500
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Image 3
As per Claim 10:
Li discloses in Figure 12:
The one-piece resonant element (“resonant structure”, 1) according to claim 1, characterized in that at least one of the resonant end parts (“resonant head”, 121 and “resonant tail”, 123, as shown in related Figure 1) is provided with a planar extension portion in its end area (the planar extension portion is evident by the differences in width as shown in figure 12 and further depicted in Image 4 below),
the planar extension portion extending in a plane substantially perpendicular to a lengthwise direction of the middle part (“middle portion”, 122, as shown in related Figure 1) for providing a coupling surface (“resonant head 121… strongest electrical coupling strength, while the resonant tail 123… strongest magnetic coupling strength”, [Col. 5, Lines 30-35], therefore resonant head 121 and resonant tail 123 each inherently provide a coupling surface).
PNG
media_image4.png
289
433
media_image4.png
Greyscale
Image 4
As per Claim 11:
Li discloses in Figure 12:
The one-piece resonant element (“resonant structure”, 1) according to claim 1, characterized in that the resonant element (1) is made of metal or surface metallized (“the filter used is… a traditional metal coaxial filter”, [Col. 1, Lines 25-27], therefore the resonant element would inherently be made of metal).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 5-6, 12, and 15-20 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
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