The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
The disclosure is objected to because of the following informalities: Page 1, in paragraph [0003], first line therein, note that the recitation of “a CPW” should be rewritten as --a coplanar waveguide (CPW)-- for an appropriate characterization. Page 1, in the heading immediately preceding paragraph [0005] and page 5, in the heading therein, note that --OF THE INVENTION-- should be inserted after “SUMMARY” (i.e. page 1) and inserted after “DETAIL DESCRIPTION” (i.e. page 5), respectively for consistency with PTO guidelines. At all appropriate occurrences throughout the specification, note that the recitation of “the dielectric substrate” should be rewritten as --the at least one dielectric substrate-- for consistency in descriptive terminology (e.g. paragraphs [0006], [0012], [0016], [0018], etc.). Page 5, in paragraph [0033], 6th line therein, note that --the detail description of-- should be inserted after “in” for an appropriate characterization. Throughout the detail description of the drawings, it is noted that for the description of individual drawings or descriptions of collective drawings, there are certain reference labels in such descriptions that do not appear in or are not associated with the drawing or drawings being described. Accordingly, those reference labels should then be reference with respect to the drawing(s) in which those labels actually appear. Some, but not all examples include: in paragraphs [0037] & [0038], labels (421, 422, 11, 12) appear in --FIG. 2--; in paragraphs [0044] & [0046], which describe “FIG. 2”, labels (1, 5, 51, 512) do not appear in FIG. 2 and should each be reference with respect to --FIG. 1--; in paragraph [0050], which describes “FIG. 3”, labels (1, 11, 41, 4211) do not appear in FIG. 3 and should be reference with respect to the drawings in which they appear; etc. Appropriate correction is required.
The disclosure is objected to because of the following informalities: Note that the following reference labels and descriptive wording appearing in the indicated drawings need to be correspondingly described in the specification description of the indicated drawings for clarity and completeness of description: FIG. 3 (21, 423); FIG. 4 {signal (dB), frequency (GHz)}. Appropriate correction is required.
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 various waveguide shapes (i.e. in claim 14) and the phase array antenna (i.e. claim 17), respectively must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). No new matter should be entered.
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. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
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 1-16; 17-20 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 pre-AIA the applicant regards as the invention.
In claim 1, line 3 and in claim 17, line 4, for the “back cavity”, note that it is unclear whether the location of such a feature can be accurately characterized as being located “at a side of the waveguide transmission cavity”, respectively at these instances and thus appropriate clarification is needed.
In claims 1, 17, last two lines in each claim, note that it is unclear whether the recitation of the “ground electrode” being “partially extend into the waveguide transmission cavity”, respectively at these instances would be an accurate characterization of this aspect of the invention and thus appropriate clarification is needed.
In claim 11, line 2, note that it is unclear how “at least two pairs of signal transmission structures”, as recited herein would relate to the “at least one group of signal transmission structures”, as recited earlier in independent claim 1, from which this claim ultimately depends from (i.e. the pair is a part of the group, the pair and the group are separate and distinct features, etc.) and thus appropriate clarification is needed.
In claim 17, note that it is unclear how the features recited in the body of the claim pertain or relate to the “phase array antenna”, as recited in the preamble, especially since the body of the claim does not appear to provide any features therein that would characterize and/or relate to an “antenna”. Appropriate clarification is needed.
The following claims have been found to be objectionable for reasons set forth below:
In claim 1, line 6; in claim 11, line 1; in claim 13, line 1: note that the recitation of “the dielectric substrate” should be rewritten as --the at least one dielectric substrate--, respectively at these instances for consistency in claim terminology.
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, 3, 4, 7, 8, 11, 14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being clearly anticipated by Shen et al (‘425).
Shen et al (i.e. FIG. 5) discloses a conversion circuit, comprising: a multi-layered printed circuit board (i.e. PCB 501) including at least one dielectric substrate layer defining a transition substrate region; a waveguide transmission cavity (i.e. an unlabeled rectangular shape (i.e. with respect to claim 14) waveguide having a port (504) in FIG. 2) attached to an upper surface of the multi-layered PCB (501); a waveguide back-short cavity (i.e. waveguide back-short 502) attached to a lower surface of the multi-layered PCB (501); a group of transmission lines (e.g. an input line and first & second output lines (all unlabeled, but have respective ports (502, 505, 506) in FIG. 5) are disposed on the PCB (501) as to extend into the transition substrate region and align with the waveguide transmission cavity. As evident from, for example, FIGS. 10, 11A, 12A, etc., which all relate to FIG. 5, the transmission line groups are configured to be of the coplanar waveguide (CPW) type (i.e. a CPW is characterized by a signal line which is flanked on opposite sides thereof by corresponding ground electrodes, as evident from FIGS. 10, 11A, 12A). Regarding, claim 3, as evident from, for example, related FIG. 10, some of the CPW lines include different signal segments of different or unequal width/length to provide to provide for different impedances. Regarding claim 4, as evident from related FIG. 9(C), the CPW line includes a first segment that is rectangular in shape and a second segment that is fan shaped. Regarding claim 7, as evident from related FIG. 10 (i.e. the lower center figure), the group of lines includes at least a pair of CPW lines extending into the transition region from short sides of the waveguide and aligned along a horizontal line, such that symmetry of the pair of lines is along the horizontal line. Regarding claim 8, as evident from related FIG. 10, the ground electrodes associated with respective CPW lines are all connected together (i.e. through plated through holes). Regarding claim 11, again referring to related FIG. 10, lower center figure, symmetry can also exist along a vertical line extending through the centrally disposed CPW line that is perpendicular to the horizontal line of symmetry described above with respect to claim 7.
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 of this title, 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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claims 17, 19, 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Shen et al (‘425) in view of Seler et al.
Shen et al, as described in the preceding rejection, discloses the claimed invention, except for the use thereof as a part of a phase array antenna.
Seler et al exemplarily discloses various signal line to waveguide transition structures usable in microwave applications. In particular, as described in column 5, lines 54-56, one such application is for use in radar applications, which as known to one of ordinary skill in the art, necessarily includes a phase antenna array.
Accordingly, it would have been obvious in view of the references, taken as a whole, to have used the signal line to waveguide transition, as taught by Shen et al, in a phase antenna array, such as exemplarily taught by Seler et al. Such a modification would have been considered an obvious substitution of art recognized equivalent of a specific signal line to waveguide transition in place of a generic signal line to waveguide transition in Seler et al, thereby suggesting the obviousness of such a modification. Accordingly, as an obvious consequence of such a modification, the resultant combination necessarily would have included signal lines with different impedance segments (i.e. claim 19) and signal lines with a rectangular segment and a fan shape segment (i.e. claim 20).
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Shen et al (‘742) discloses a low loss transition including a plurality of signal lines coupled to a transition to a waveguide.
Any inquiry concerning this communication should be directed to Benny Lee at telephone number 571 272 1764.
/BENNY T LEE/PRIMARY EXAMINER
ART UNIT 2843
B. Lee
Prosecution Insights