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 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) 1-17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Asao et al. (US 6995628) in view of Nagai (US 7212087) and Ma (CN 105633516).
As to claim 1, Asao et al.’s figure 1 shows a device for transmitting an RF (radio frequency) signal (col, 1, lines 8-10), comprising: a first waveguide (2) that has a rectangular transverse section with a long side and a short side and extends linearly, and is disposed so that an RF (radio frequency) signal enters one side thereof and the RF signal exits the other side; a second waveguide (3) that has the same shape of transverse section as the transverse section of the first waveguide and extends linearly, and is disposed on the other side of the first waveguide so that the RF signal enters one side thereof and exits the other side, and its transverse section is disposed in a form that crosses the transverse section of the first waveguide; and a conversion tube (10) that extends linearly, and is disposed between the first waveguide and the second waveguide to connect the first waveguide and the second waveguide, wherein when the RF signal has an H-plane, it passes through the conversion tube and is converted into an E-plane, and when the RF signal has an E-plane, it passes through the conversion tube and is converted into an H-plane. The figure fails to show that conversion tube has a transverse section with a shape in which two quadrilaterals partially overlap each other. However, Nagai’s figures 9A and 9B show a conversion tube (30) that has a transverse section with a shape in which two quadrilaterals partially overlap each other. Furthermore, Ma’s figures 6-11 show a conversion tube (2) that has a transverse section with a shape in which two quadrilaterals partially overlap each other. Note that Asao et al.’s figure 10 shows that the corner angle of slit 11 is desirably selected. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one hang ordinary skill in the art to shape the conversion tube with two quadrilaterals partially overlap each other for the purpose of achieving optimum performance.
As to claim 2, Asao et al.’s figure 2 suggests that that the transverse section of the conversion tube has a shape in which two squares having a length of one side shorter than that of the long side of the rectangle partially overlap each other. Therefore, setting the dimension as claimed is seen as an obvious design preference to ensure optimum performance, MPEP 2144.04. IV. A. and MPEP 2144.05.
As to claim 3, the modified Asao et al.’s figure 1 shows that the transverse section of the conversion tube has a shape in which the two squares are partially overlapped in a diagonal direction.
As to claim 4, the modified Asao et al.’s figure 1 shows that when the transverse section of the first waveguide, the transverse section of the second waveguide, and the transverse section of the conversion tube are arranged on the same plane, a circumscribed quadrilateral circumscribed by the transverse section of the first waveguide and the transverse section of the second waveguide is also circumscribed by the transverse section of the conversion tube (similar device, similar operation).
As to claim 5, the modified Asao et al.’s figure 1 shows that the transverse section of the conversion tube is arranged to occupy the remaining region except for two corners facing diagonally within the circumscribed quadrilateral (dependent on the selected sizes. Arranging the transverse section and the conversion tube as claimed is seen as an obvious design preference).
As to claim 6, the modified Asao et al.’s figure 1 shows that the transverse section of the first waveguide and the transverse section of the second waveguide are arranged within the circumscribed quadrilateral, occupying a portion of each of two corners not occupied by the transverse section of the conversion tube (arranging the transverse section and the conversion tube as claimed is seen as an obvious design preference).
As to claim 7, the modified Asao et al.’s figure 1 shows that in the two corners not occupied by the transverse section of the conversion tube within the circumscribed quadrilateral, a non-occupied region not occupied by the transverse section of the first waveguide and the transverse section of the second waveguide is formed in a square shape.
As to claims 8-13, Asao et al.’s teaches that the “invention relates to a waveguide unit for transmitting and processing microwave or millimeter wave signal.” It is known that microwave is range from about 0.3 GHz to 300 GHz. Therefore, selecting the RF frequency band of 76 to 79 GHz for Asao et al.’s device is seen as an obvious design preference to ensure optimum performance, MPEP 2144.05.
As to claim 14-17, selecting the dimensions as claimed is seen as an obvious design preference to ensure optimum performance, MPEP 2144.05.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ANH-QUAN TRA whose telephone number is (571)272-1755. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri from 8:00 A.M.-5:00 P.M.
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.
/QUAN TRA/
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 2843
Prosecution Insights