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 .
Election/Restrictions
Newly submitted claims 26-31 are directed to an invention that is independent or distinct from the invention originally claimed for the following reasons:
I. Amended claims 1-9 and 21-25, drawn to an unit cell device, classified in H01Q3/46.
II. Newly added claims 26-31, drawn to a reconfigurable intelligent surface, classified in H01Q15/02.
Inventions I and II are related as combination and subcombination. Inventions in this relationship are distinct if it can be shown that (1) the combination as claimed does not require the particulars of the subcombination as claimed for patentability, and (2) that the subcombination has utility by itself or in other combinations (MPEP § 806.05(c)).
In the instant case, the combination as claimed does not require the particulars of the subcombination as claimed because the intelligent surface of the combination does not require at least a portion of the ground metallic layer comprising metal-insulator transition material controllable to a nonconductive state at which resonance does not occur at a location of the portion of the subcombination. The subcombination has separate utility such as directing electromagnetic wave.
Since applicant has received an action on the merits for the originally presented invention, this invention has been constructively elected by original presentation for prosecution on the merits. Accordingly, claims 26-31 are withdrawn from consideration as being directed to a non-elected invention. See 37 CFR 1.142(b) and MPEP § 821.03.
To preserve a right to petition, the reply to this action must distinctly and specifically point out supposed errors in the restriction requirement. Otherwise, the election shall be treated as a final election without traverse. Traversal must be timely. Failure to timely traverse the requirement will result in the loss of right to petition under 37 CFR 1.144. If claims are subsequently added, applicant must indicate which of the subsequently added claims are readable upon the elected invention.
Should applicant traverse on the ground that the inventions are not patentably distinct, applicant should submit evidence or identify such evidence now of record showing the inventions to be obvious variants or clearly admit on the record that this is the case. In either instance, if the examiner finds one of the inventions unpatentable over the prior art, the evidence or admission may be used in a rejection under 35 U.S.C. 103 or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(a) of the other invention.
Claim Objections
Claim 9 is objected to because of the following informalities:
The phrase “The unit cell device of claim 6” should be changed to “The unit cell device of claim 8” because the features “a controllable energy transfer element” and “conductive or non-conductive state” are recited in claim 8.
Appropriate correction is required.
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 1-5 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Mckinzie (US
2002/0167456) in view of Liang (CN 117458160) and further in view of G. J. Gourley, E. Kumi-Barimah, G. Jose and D. E. Anagnostou, "A Planar Pattern Reconfigurable Yagi-Uda Antenna Using Electrically Biased Vanadium Dioxide (VO2)," 2023 17th European Conference on Antennas and Propagation (EuCAP), Florence, Italy, 2023, pp. 1-4, doi: 10.23919/EuCAP57121.2023.10133409. (hereinafter Gourley”).
Regarding claim 1, Mckinzie discloses in Figure 16 and par. 0072, a unit cell device, comprising:
a top metal resonator layer (1610);
ferroelectric material (1614, see par. 0071) configured as a ferroelectric layer below the top
metal resonator layer;
a ground metallic layer (1606) below the ferroelectric material; and
[[first and second]] bias pad (see Fig. 16, line below 1606 of 1620 and voltage Vbias 1622) configured for application of a bias voltage across [[the first and second]] bias pad to generate current through the ferroelectric material,
wherein an amount of the bias voltage determines a dielectric permittivity of the ferroelectric
material, and the dielectric permittivity determines a phase response of the unit cell with respect to redirecting an electromagnetic wave impinging on the unit cell device.
McKinzie does not disclose the bias pad comprising a first and second bias pads.
Liang discloses in Figure 1 and 4, the bias pad comprising a first and second bias pads (15-16-1 and 15-16-2).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date
of claimed invention to modify the bias of Mckinzie with the bias comprising bias pads as taught by Liang
to achieve broadband for the unit cell device.
McKinzie does not disclose at least a portion of the ground metallic layer comprising metal-insulator transition material controllable to a nonconductive state at which resonance does not occur at a location of the portion.
Gourley discloses in Figure 1, at least a portion of the ground metallic layer (Reflector, Fig. 1) comprising metal-insulator transition material (VO2, Fig. 1) controllable to a nonconductive state at which resonance does not occur at a location of the portion.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of claimed invention to modify the ground layer of McKinzie with the ground layer having at least a portion comprising metal-insulator transition material as taught by Gourley to achieve beam pattern reconfigurability for the cell device.
Therefore, to employ having the bias and ground layer as claimed invention would have been obvious to person skill in the art.
Regarding claim 2, as applied to claim 1, Mckinzie discloses in Figure 16 and par. 0071,
wherein the ferroelectric material comprises barium strontium titanate.
Regarding claim 3, as applied to claim 1, Mckinzie discloses in Figure 16, wherein the ferroelectric material (1614) is above an upper substrate (1604, see par. 0070), and wherein the ground metallic layer (1606) is below the upper substrate (1604).
Regarding claim 4, as applied to claim 3, Liang discloses in Figures 1-4, wherein the ground metallic layer (4) is above a lower substrate (6), wherein the first and second bias pads (see layer 5, Fig. 1 and Fig. 4) are below the lower substrate (6), and further comprising first and second vias (7, 7) insulated from the ground metallic layer (4), and wherein the first and second vias (7, 7) electrically couple the first and second bias pads(16-1, 16-2, Fig. 4) to first and second areas of the ferroelectric material, respectively, through the lower substrate, through the ground metallic layer, and through the upper substrate.
Regarding claim 5, the combination of Mckinzie, Figure 16 and Liang, Figures 1-4 discloses wherein the unit cell device is part of a reconfigurable intelligent surface of respective unit cell
devices comprising the unit cell device.
Claims 6-9 and 21-25 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Mckinzie (US
2002/0167456) in view of Liang (CN 117458160) and Gourley and further in view of Matos (US 11,133,588).
Regarding claims 6-7, McKinzie/Liang/ Gourley disclose every feature of claimed invention as expressly recited in claim 1, except for the top metal resonator layer comprising metal-insulator transition material; and the metal-insulator transition material comprising vanadium dioxide.
Matos discloses in Figures 1 and 11b, the top metal resonator layer (110) comprising metal-insulator transition material; and the metal-insulator transition material comprising vanadium dioxide (VO2).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of claimed invention to modify the top metal resonator layer of McKinzie with the top layer as taught by Matos to reduce reflection loss and achieve wide beam width for the device.
Regarding claim 8, as applied to claim 6, Matos discloses further comprising a controllable energy transfer element (“electronic control”, see col. 5, lines 30-56)) configured to selectively apply energy to the metal-insulator transition material to determine a conductive or nonconductive state of the metal-insulator transition material.
Regarding claim 9, as applied to claim 6, Matos discloses in Figures 1 and 11b,
wherein the unit cell device is part of a reconfigurable intelligent surface (col. 4, lines 63-67) of respective unit cell devices comprising the unit cell device,
wherein the controllable energy transfer element comprises a controllable heating element (125) of a heater network (127), and wherein the heater network is controlled to determine respective conductive or nonconductive states of at least some of the respective unit cell devices, to determine an active aperture of the reconfigurable intelligent surface with respect to redirecting the electromagnetic wave impinging on the respective unit cells based on respective phase responses of an active unit cell subgroup of the respective unit cells.
Regarding claim 21, Mckinzie discloses Figure 16 and par. 0072, a unit cell device, comprising:
a top metal resonator layer (1610);
a ferroelectric layer (1614, see par. 0071) below the top metal resonator layer;
a ground metallic layer (1606) below the ferroelectric layer (1610),
[[first and second]] bias pad (see Fig. 16,line below 1606 of 1620 and Vbias 1622) configured for application of a bias voltage across the first and second bias pads,
wherein an amount of the bias voltage determines a dielectric permittivity of the ferroelectric layer, and the dielectric permittivity determines a phase response of the unit cell device with respect to reflecting an electromagnetic wave impinging on the unit cell device; and
McKinzie does not disclose the bias pad comprising a first and second bias pads; the top metal resonator layer comprising metal-insulator transition material and a controllable energy transfer element configured to selectively apply energy to the metal-insulator transition material of the top metal resonator layer to switch the metal-insulator transition material between a conductive state, in which the top metal resonator layer resonates to reflect the electromagnetic wave according to the phase response determined by the dielectric permittivity, and a nonconductive state, in which the top metal resonator layer does not resonate; and
wherein at least a portion of the ground metallic layer comprises metal-insulator transition material controllable to a nonconductive state at which resonance does not occur at a location of the portion.
Liang discloses in Figure 1 and 4, the bias pad comprising a first and second bias pads (15-16-1 and 15-16-2).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date
of claimed invention to modify the bias of Mckinzie with the bias comprising bias pads as taught by Liang
to achieve broadband for the unit cell device.
Matos discloses in Figures 1 and 11b, the top metal resonator layer (110) comprising metal-insulator transition material and a controllable energy transfer element (“electronic control”, see col. 5, lines 30-56) configured to selectively apply energy to the metal-insulator transition material of the top metal resonator layer (110) to switch the metal-insulator transition material between a conductive state, in which the top metal resonator layer resonates to reflect the electromagnetic wave according to the phase response determined by the dielectric permittivity, and a nonconductive state, in which the top metal resonator layer does not resonate.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of claimed invention to modify the top metal resonator layer of McKinzie with the top layer and controllable energy transfer element as taught by Matos to reduce reflection loss and achieve wide beam width for the device.
Gourley discloses in Figure 1, at least a portion of the ground metallic layer (Reflector, Fig. 1) comprising metal-insulator transition material (VO2, Fig. 1) controllable to a nonconductive state at which resonance does not occur at a location of the portion.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of claimed invention to modify the ground layer of McKinzie with the ground layer having at least a portion comprising metal-insulator transition material as taught by Gourley to achieve beam pattern reconfigurability for the cell device.
Regarding claim 22, as applied to claim 21, Matos discloses in Figures 1-2,
wherein the controllable energy transfer element comprises a controllable heating element of a heater network (127).
Regarding claim 23, as applied to claim 21, Matos discloses in Figure 11b, wherein the metal-insulator transition material of the top metal resonator layer (110) comprises vanadium dioxide (VO2).
Regarding claim 24, as applied to claim 21, McKinzie discloses in Figure 16 and par. 0071,
wherein the ferroelectric material comprises barium strontium titanate.
Regarding claim 25, as applied to claim 21, Matos discloses in Figures 1-2, 11b and col. 4, lines 60-67, wherein the unit cell device is part of a reconfigurable intelligent surface, and
wherein the controllable energy transfer element is controlled, together with other controllable energy transfer elements of other unit cell devices of the reconfigurable intelligent surface, to determine respective conductive or nonconductive states that set an active aperture of the reconfigurable intelligent surface for redirecting the electromagnetic wave based on respective phase responses of an active unit cell subgroup of the unit cell devices.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1-9 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.
Conclusion
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.
Inquiry
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DIEU HIEN T DUONG whose telephone number is (571)272-8980. The examiner can normally be reached 8:00am-4:00pm.
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 CRUZ 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.
/DIEU HIEN T DUONG/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2845
