DETAILED ACTION
Response to Amendment
The amendment filed 8/26/2026 has been entered. The applicant has cancelled claims 1-11 and added new claims 12-22. Claims 12-22 remain pending in the application. The amendment has overcome all the objections and rejections set forth in the Non-Final Office Action mailed 6/12/2026 (“FAOM”), which are hereby withdrawn.
Response to Argument
Applicant’s arguments, pages 6-11 of the Remarks filed 8/26/2026 (“Remarks”), have been fully considered and have been found to be persuasive. Therefore, those grounds of rejections have now been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, new ground(s) of objections and rejection(s) under 35 USC 112 have now been made, which were necessitated by the applicant’s amendment.
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, the following features must be shown or cancelled (see the corresponding 112 rejections below for explanation):
Claim 12, lines 11-12: “the pair of convex edges”;
Claim 16, lines 1-2: “The phase shifter circuit of claim 12, wherein said at least one main line extends in a pair of opposite branches”;
Claim 22, line 3: “said plurality of scattering elements.”
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. No new matter should be entered. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
Specification
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:
Claim 12, lines 11-12: “the pair of convex edges”;
Claim 22, line 3: “said plurality of scattering elements.”
Claim Objections
Claim 12 is objected to because of the following informalities:
Claim 12, line 9, recites “a aperture” should be --an aperture--.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112(a)
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.
Claims 12-22 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claims 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, at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention.
Claim 12, lines 11-12, recites “said plurality of switching elements controlling an electrical contact between the pair of convex edges and said at least one main line.” The term “the pair of convex edges” does not appear anywhere in the original disclosure and therefore represents a new matter.
Claims 13-22 are also rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) as dependent on the rejected claims.
Claim 21 is additionally rejected under 112(a) because it recites “said plurality of scattering elements,” which does not appear anywhere in the original disclosure and therefore represents a new matter.
Claim 16 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) as failing to comply with the enablement requirement. The claims contain subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to enable one skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and/or use the invention.
Claim 16 recites “The phase shifter circuit of claim 12, wherein said at least one main line extends in a pair of opposite branches...” Claim 16 thus appears to claim the second embodiment described in Fig. 2 and ¶¶13, 63-70 of the disclosure (for ease of reference all cites are to U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2026/0254081A1). However, the disclosure, as filed, does not contain sufficient information regarding the subject matter of the claim as to enable one skilled in the pertinent art to make and use the claimed invention without undue or unreasonable experimentation. MPEP 2164. Specifically, the disclosure describes the second embodiment as having “no grooves extend from the sides of the main line” (Fig. 2, ¶13). In contrast, claim 12, from which claim 16 depends, requires a “plurality of grooves extend from at least one side of said at least one main line” (Claim 12, lines 17-18), which is a feature of the first embodiment (Fig. 1, ¶¶12, 52-62). The disclosure does not describe any embodiment comprising all the features of both claim 1 and claim 16 and therefore does not enable one skilled in the art to make and/or use the invention of claim 16.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112(b)
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.
Claims 12-22 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor, or a joint inventor, regards as the invention.
Claim 12, lines 11-12, recites “said plurality of switching elements controlling an electrical contact between the pair of convex edges and said at least one main line.”
There is insufficient antecedent basis for the term “the pair of convex edges.” This term does not appear anywhere in the original disclosure and it is unclear what it is referring to, rendering the claim vague and indefinite.
Claims 13-22 are also rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) as dependent on the rejected claim.
Claim 21 is additionally rejected under 112(b) because there is insufficient antecedent basis for the term “said plurality of scattering elements” and it is unclear what it is referring to, rendering the claim vague and indefinite.
Due to the 112 issues noted above, no meaningful prior art examination of claims 12-22 is currently possible and the examiner is unable to make a meaningful prior art rejection of these claims. Note that the lack of any prior art rejection should not be construed as an indication of allowable subject matter because the patentability determination of these claims cannot be made at this time due to the ambiguity in the claim language. When the 112 issues are resolved, the examiner will conduct prior art examination and may apply prior art rejections to these claims as appropriate.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. 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 VICTOR COLE, telephone number (571) 272-4686. The examiner can be reached Monday-Friday, 9AM-5PM ET.
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 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 www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/patent-center for more information about Patent Center and 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.
/VICTOR COLE/
Examiner, Art Unit 2843
/ANDREA LINDGREN BALTZELL/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2843
