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 1-13 are objected to because of the following informalities: Claim 1 recites the limitations “the side of a first surface of the semiconductor substrate” and “the side of a second surface of the semiconductor substrate” in the 4th and 5th lines, respectively, however, “a side” was not previously introduced, thus should be corrected to avoid lack of antecedent basis. Dependent claims are likewise objected to. Appropriate correction is required.
Claims 1-13 are objected to because of the following informalities: Claim 1 beings with “Transmitarray antenna cell comprising” however, the examiner suggests to begin with an article such as “A transmitarray antenna cell…”. Dependent claims are likewise objected to. Appropriate correction is required.
Claims 2-10 are objected to because of the following informalities: The claims recite in the preamble “Cell according to…”, however, the examiner suggests to begin with an article to reference “The transmitarray antenna cell…” to be consistent with independent claim 1. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 11 is objected to because of the following informalities: Claim 11 beings with “Transmitarray…”, however, the examiner suggests to begin with an article such as “A transmitarray…” to be consistent with independent claim 1. Dependent claims are likewise objected to. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 12 is objected to because of the following informalities: Claim 11 beings with “Array …”, however, the examiner suggests to correct it to correspond to claim 11 upon which it depends on for consistency. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 13 is objected to because of the following informalities: Claim 11 beings with “Antenna…”, however, the examiner suggests to correct it to correspond to claim 11 upon which it depends on for consistency. 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.
Claim 10 is 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 10 recites the limitation " wherein the radiating element(s) are formed…" in the first and second lines. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
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)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1, 2 & 6-13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Makhail et al. WO Publication WO2022119064A1 (cited by applicant).
Regarding Claim 1, Makhail et al. teaches transmitarray antenna cell (Figs. 1-4) comprising:
a semiconductor substrate (3 Fig. 2 Par. 40);
a first rectilinear polarizer (2 Fig. 2 Par. 40), located on the side of a first surface of the semiconductor substrate (Fig. 2); and
a second rectilinear polarizer (4 Fig. 2 Par. 40), located on the side of a second surface of the semiconductor substrate opposite to the first surface and orthogonal to the first polarizer (Fig. 2); and
at least one radiating element (6 Fig. 2 Par. 41) interposed between the second surface of the semiconductor substrate and the second polarizer (Fig. 2), said at least one radiating element being adapted to switching between at least two phase states (phase adjustment switching Par. 41, 45).
Regarding Claim 2, Makhail et al. teaches wherein each radiating element comprises at least two parts coupled by a switch formed in the semiconductor substrate (switch 8, 9 Figs. 2, 4 Par. 41).
Regarding Claim 6, Makhail et al. teaches wherein each radiating element is located on top of and in contact with the second surface of the semiconductor substrate (implied from Fig. 2 Par. 48).
Regarding Claim 7, Makhail et al. teaches wherein: the first polarizer comprises a plurality of first conductive strips substantially parallel to one another (strips implied from “the polarization filters are perforated metal sheets” Par. 26); and the second polarizer comprises a plurality of second conductive strips substantially parallel to one another and substantially orthogonal to the first conductive strips (strips implied from “the polarization filters are perforated metal sheets” Par. 26).
Regarding Claim 8, Makhail et al. teaches further comprising: a first insulating region interposed between the first surface of the semiconductor substrate and the first polarizer (dielectric filling Par. 40); and a second insulating region interposed between the second surface of the semiconductor substrate and the second polarizer (dielectric filling Par. 40).
Regarding Claim 9, Makhail et al. teaches wherein the first and second insulating regions form part of insulating layers of a printed circuit board, each radiating element and the first and second polarizers being formed in metallization levels of the printed circuit board (Par. 40, claims 7-9).
Regarding Claim 10, Makhail et al. teaches wherein the radiating element(s) are formed in at least one metallization level of an interconnection stack interposed between the semiconductor substrate and the second polarizer (Fig. 2 Par. 48).
Regarding Claim 11, Makhail et al. teaches transmitarray comprising a plurality of cells according to claim 1 (Fig. 1).
Regarding Claim 12, Makhail et al. teaches wherein the semiconductor substrate is common to a plurality of cells of the array (Abstract, Fig. 1).
Regarding Claim 13, Makhail et al. teaches antenna comprising a transmitarray according to claim 11 and at least one source configured to irradiate a surface of the array (radiator Fig. 1).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 3-5 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.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
Regarding Claim 3, the prior art of record, when taken alone or in combination does not fairly teach nor render obvious the limitations “wherein said at least one radiating element comprises exactly first and second parts each having, in top view, a T-shape” as required by the claim. Claims 4 and 5 depend therefrom.
Conclusion
The cited art in PTO-892 was found during the examiner's search, but was not relied upon for this office action. However it is still considered pertinent to the applicant's disclosure.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MICHAEL M BOUIZZA whose telephone number is (571)272-6124. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday, 9am-5pm, 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, Dimary Lopez can be reached at (571) 270-7893. 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.
/MICHAEL M BOUIZZA/Examiner, Art Unit 2845
Prosecution Insights