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 Arguments
Applicant’s arguments have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
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 1-2 and 4-15 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 “wherein the amplifier array is configured to irradiate, or to be irradiated by, the transmitarray” is indefinite, since it’s unclear how the amplifier array “is configured to irradiate, or to be irradiated by, the transmit array” absent any feed structure or source. In other words, it’s not understood how the claimed antenna performs such “irradiate” or “be irradiated by” functionality.
The spec. discloses, e.g., in the printed publication:
[0051] In the illustrated example, the elementary cells 103 of amplifier array 101 are connected to a circuit 109. Circuit 109 is, for example, a radio frequency signal transceiver circuit, for example a circuit intended to generate signals to be transmitted by reconfigurable antenna 100 and/or to process signals received by reconfigurable antenna 100. This example is however not limiting, and circuit 109 may also implement additional functions such as functions of analog-to-digital conversion, filtering, impedance matching, interference elimination, etc. As an example, elementary cells 103 are connected to the circuit 109 by conductive tracks and/or conductive vias of the printed circuit board inside and on top of which amplifier array 101 is formed.
[0052] FIG. 1 more particularly illustrates a case in which reconfigurable antenna 100 operates in transmit mode. In this case, each elementary cell 103 of amplifier array 101 is capable of receiving a signal from circuit 109 and of transmitting an electromagnetic radiation, corresponding to the received signal, from its antenna elements 103b towards transmitarray 105. Each elementary cell 107 of transmitarray 105 is capable of receiving, on its first antenna element 107a, the electromagnetic radiation emitted by the elementary cells 103 of amplifier array 101 and of transmitting back this radiation from its second antenna element 107b, for example by introducing a known phase shift ø.
Hence, it appears that a transceiver source 109 is critical to the invention, absent which the “antenna” cannot operate as its intended purpose, which is, inter alia, to irradiate an electromagnetic radiation by a transmitarray.
Claims 2 and 4-15 are rejected for depending therefrom.
There should be a clear recitation of interrelated structure in order to provide a complete and operable antenna.
The following claim, drafted by the examiner and considered to distinguish patentably over the art of record in this application, is presented to applicant for consideration:
1. (Currently Amended) An antenna comprising:
an amplifier array comprising a plurality of first elementary cells each comprising a first antenna element facing a transmitarray, the amplifier array being capable of transmitting an electromagnetic radiation from its first antenna elements towards the transmitarray, or of receiving[[,]] on its first antenna elements, an electromagnetic radiation emitted by the transmitarray; and
the transmitarray comprising a plurality of second elementary cells each comprising a second antenna element facing the amplifier array and a third respective antenna element opposite to the second antenna element, each second elementary cell being capable of receiving, on its second antenna element, the electromagnetic radiation emitted by the first elementary cells of the amplifier array, or of transmitting the electromagnetic radiation[[,]] from its second antenna element[[,]] towards the amplifier array,
wherein the amplifier array is coupled to a horn antenna and a transceiver, such that the amplifier array is configured to irradiate, or to be irradiated by, the transmitarray,
wherein the amplifier array is separated from the transmitarray by a distance equal[[,]] to within 20%, to a central transmission and/or reception wavelength of the antenna.
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 1-2, 4, 6-8, 11-13 and 15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over “Ebling” (US 7898480).
Claim 1: As best understood, Ebling discloses antenna comprising:
an amplifier array comprising a plurality of first elementary cells 18 (Fig. 6) each comprising a first antenna element facing a transmitarray 14, the amplifier array being capable of transmitting an electromagnetic radiation 20 from its first antenna elements towards the transmitarray or of receiving, on its first antenna elements, an electromagnetic radiation emitted by the transmitarray (col. 2, ll. 27-38); and
the transmitarray comprising a plurality of second elementary cells 24.1 each comprising a second antenna element facing the amplifier array and a third antenna element 24.2 opposite to the second antenna element, each second elementary cell being capable of receiving, on its second antenna element, the electromagnetic radiation emitted by the elementary cells of the amplifier array or of transmitting the electromagnetic radiation, from its second antenna element, towards the amplifier array (para. bridging cols. 2 and 3),
wherein the amplifier array is configured to irradiate, or to be irradiated by, the transmitarray (see Fig. 6), the amplifier array being separated from the transmitarray by a distance (filled by dielectric material 16).
Ebling fails to expressly teach the distance being equal, to within 20%, to a central transmission and/or reception wavelength of the antenna.
However, it has been held that discovering an optimum value of a result effective variable involves only routine skill in the art. In re Boesch, 617 F.2d 272, 205 USPQ 215 (CCP A 1980).
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 Ebling’s antenna such that the distance is equal, to within 20%, to a central transmission and/or reception wavelength of the antenna, in order to facilitate transmission and reception of different beams of electromagnetic energy (col. 2, ll. 27-38).
Claim 2: Ebling fails to expressly teach wherein the distance separating the amplifier array from the transmitarray is equal, to within 10%, to the central transmission and/or reception wavelength of the antenna.
However, it has been held that discovering an optimum value of a result effective variable involves only routine skill in the art. In re Boesch, 617 F.2d 272, 205 USPQ 215 (CCP A 1980).
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 Ebling’s antenna such that the distance separating the amplifier array from the transmitarray is equal, to within 10%, to the central transmission and/or reception wavelength of the antenna, in order to facilitate transmission and reception of different beams of electromagnetic energy (col. 2, ll. 27-38).
Claims 4 and 6: Ebling teaches he antenna according to claim 1, wherein each first elementary cell further comprises at least one amplifier 66 (Fig. 9) connected to the first antenna element 18;
wherein each first elementary cell is connected to a radio frequency signal transceiver circuit (col. 6, first para.).
Claims 7-8: Ebling teaches the antenna according to claim 1, further comprising at least one source 54 (Fig. 1) configured to irradiate, or to be irradiated by, the amplifier array (see Fig. 6);
wherein said at least one source is connected to a radio frequency signal transceiver circuit (col. 6, first para.).
Claims 11-12: Ebling teaches fewer first elementary cells than second elementary cells (see Fig. 6);
wherein the second and third antenna elements are coupled by a phase-shift circuit (col. 2, ll. 57-66).
Claim 13: Ebling teaches the antenna according to claim 1, wherein the amplifier array is devoid of phase-shift circuits (see Fig. 6).
Claim 15: Ebling fails to expressly teach four times fewer first elementary cells than second elementary cells.
However, it has been held that discovering an optimum value of a result effective variable involves only routine skill in the art. In re Boesch, 617 F.2d 272, 205 USPQ 215 (CCP A 1980).
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 Ebling’s invention to include four times fewer first elementary cells than second elementary cells, in order to facilitate transmission and reception of different beams of electromagnetic energy (col. 2, ll. 27-38).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 5, 9-10 and 14 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.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Ko (US 10931029)
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 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