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 .
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS), submitted on September 25th, 2025, is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
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 15 and associated dependent claims 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 15 recites the limitation "compound lens" in line 2. 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.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1-5, 7-8, 14-15, 22-24, 26-27, and 32 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) and (a)(2) as being anticipated by Jesme et al. (US 20210151882 A1), herein referred to as Jesme.
Regarding claim 1, Jesme discloses a lens {fig. 15} for use with a signal feed for shaping electromagnetic (EM) radiation energy originating from the signal feed when energized {Stepped GRIN lens 610}, the lens configured to operate at a defined center frequency (fc) having a free space wavelength (Xc) {para. 0098}, the lens comprising: a plurality of dielectric materials stacked side by side, wherein an adjacent one of the plurality of dielectric materials has a dielectric constant (Dk) value that is different from a Dk value of another adjacent one of the plurality of dielectric materials {para. 0099}, the plurality of dielectric materials having an overall footprint (a x b) in an x-y plane and an overall thickness (t) in a z-direction, of an orthogonal x-y-z coordinate system {see fig. 15}; wherein each cross-section of the plurality of dielectric materials in the x-y plane comprises each one of the plurality of dielectric materials {see fig. 15, u-v plane}; wherein each cross-section of the plurality of dielectric materials in one of; the x- z plane, and the y-z plane {see fig. 15, v-w plane}, comprises each one of the plurality of dielectric materials; wherein at least one cross-section of the plurality of dielectric materials in the other one of; the x-z plane, and the y-z plane, comprises only one of the plurality of dielectric materials {see fig. 15, u-w plane}.
Regarding claim 2, Jesme anticipates all limitations of base claim 1.
Jesme also discloses wherein: the plurality of dielectric materials has an extrudable construct in both the z- direction and the x-direction {see fig. 15, the dielectric pattern is repeatable and/or consistent throughout each direction, and therefore is extrudably constructable}.
Regarding claim 3, Jesme anticipates all limitations of base claim 1.
Jesme also discloses wherein: the plurality of dielectric materials has an extrudable construct in both the z- direction and the y-direction {see fig. 15, the dielectric pattern is repeatable and/or consistent throughout each direction, and therefore is extrudably constructable}.
Regarding claim 4, Jesme anticipates all limitations of base claim 1.
Jesme also discloses wherein: the plurality of dielectric materials comprises an alternating arrangement of a first dielectric material having a first Dk value (Dk=2 for example), and a second dielectric material having a second Dk value (Dk=4 for example) different from the first Dk value {paras 0008-0009, paras. 0094, 0099, 0100, the dielectric “steps” may contain only 2 different materials}.
Regarding claim 5, Jesme anticipates all limitations of base claim 4.
Jesme also discloses wherein: the second Dk value (Dk=4 for example) is at least two times the first Dk value (Dk=2 for example) {per table 1, the effective “Dk” value for entry 1 and 25 is 2.8 and 1.42, which is right at the edge of the “two times” limit, however, Jesme does also disclose in para. 0094 that air (1) and a vacuum (0) are valid dielectric profiles, and therefore fit with the limitation of “two times” when compared ot the Dk of 2.8 in entry 1}.
Regarding claim 7, Jesme anticipates all limitations of base claim 1.
Jesme also discloses wherein: the plurality of dielectric materials is in the form of a cuboid {see fig. 15}.
Regarding claim 8, Jesme anticipates all limitations of base claim 1.
Jesme also discloses wherein: each dielectric material of the plurality of dielectric materials is composed of a dielectric-only material {para. 0008-0009}.
Regarding claim 14, Jesme discloses an electromagnetic, EM, device {para. 0032}, comprising: a lens {fig. 15} for use with a signal feed for shaping electromagnetic (EM) radiation energy originating from the signal feed when energized {Stepped GRIN lens 610}, the lens configured to operate at a defined center frequency (fc) having a free space wavelength (Xc) {para. 0098}, the lens comprising: a plurality of dielectric materials stacked side by side, wherein an adjacent one of the plurality of dielectric materials has a dielectric constant (Dk) value that is different from a Dk value of another adjacent one of the plurality of dielectric materials {para. 0099}, the plurality of dielectric materials having an overall footprint (a x b) in an x-y plane and an overall thickness (t) in a z-direction, of an orthogonal x-y-z coordinate system {see fig. 15}; wherein each cross-section of the plurality of dielectric materials in the x-y plane comprises each one of the plurality of dielectric materials {see fig. 15, u-v plane}; wherein each cross-section of the plurality of dielectric materials in one of; the x- z plane, and the y-z plane {see fig. 15, v-w plane}, comprises each one of the plurality of dielectric materials; wherein at least one cross-section of the plurality of dielectric materials in the other one of; the x-z plane, and the y-z plane, comprises only one of the plurality of dielectric materials {see fig. 15, u-w plane}; and a signal feed {52} disposed in EM signal communication with the associated lens {para. 0060}.
Regarding claim 15, Jesme anticipates all limitations of base claim 14.
Jesme also discloses wherein: the associated lens or compound lens is disposed a distance (d) above the signal feed {fig. 3a, “above” is merely a matter of orientation}.
Regarding claim 22, Jesme anticipates all limitations of base claim 14.
Jesme also discloses wherein: the signal feed comprises a waveguide (52) and a slotted aperture (60).
Regarding claim 23, Jesme anticipates all limitations of base claim 22.
Jesme also discloses wherein: the overall footprint (a x b) of the associated lens or compound lens overlays at least the slotted apertures (fig. 3).
Regarding claim 24, Jesme anticipates all limitations of base claim 22.
Jesme also discloses wherein: the overall footprint (a x b) of the associated lens or compound lens overlays the waveguide and slotted aperture (see fig. 3).
Regarding claim 26, Jesme anticipates all limitations of base claim 14.
Jesme also discloses wherein: the signal feed comprises a chipset with at least one radiating element (para. 0063, waveguide may be connected to antenna, coupling lens, and other electronic components).
Regarding claim 27, Jesme anticipates all limitations of base claim 26.
Jesme also discloses wherein: the overall footprint (a x b) of the associated lens or compound lens overlays at least the signal feed (see fig. 3).
Regarding claim 32, Jesme discloses an antenna array {figs. 6-8}, comprising: a plurality of electromagnetic (EM) devices, each EM device comprising: a lens {fig. 15} for use with a signal feed for shaping electromagnetic (EM) radiation energy originating from the signal feed when energized {Stepped GRIN lens 610}, the lens configured to operate at a defined center frequency (fc) having a free space wavelength (Xc) {para. 0098}, the lens comprising: a plurality of dielectric materials stacked side by side, wherein an adjacent one of the plurality of dielectric materials has a dielectric constant (Dk) value that is different from a Dk value of another adjacent one of the plurality of dielectric materials {para. 0099}, the plurality of dielectric materials having an overall footprint (a x b) in an x-y plane and an overall thickness (t) in a z-direction, of an orthogonal x-y-z coordinate system {see fig. 15}; wherein each cross-section of the plurality of dielectric materials in the x-y plane comprises each one of the plurality of dielectric materials {see fig. 15, u-v plane}; wherein each cross-section of the plurality of dielectric materials in one of; the x- z plane, and the y-z plane {see fig. 15, v-w plane}, comprises each one of the plurality of dielectric materials; wherein at least one cross-section of the plurality of dielectric materials in the other one of; the x-z plane, and the y-z plane, comprises only one of the plurality of dielectric materials {see fig. 15, u-w plane}, and a signal feed {waveguide 52} disposed in EM signal communication with the associated lens, wherein the plurality of EM devices are arranged in an X-by-Y array formation (para. 0072, fig. 6, conceptual three dimensional unit cells).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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 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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claims 6 and 9-13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jesme and further in view of Polidore et al. (US 20210328356 A1), herein referred to as Polidore.
Regarding claim 6, Jesme anticipates all limitations of base claim 5.
Jesme does not disclose wherein: the first Dk value is 2, and the second Dk value is 4.
However, Polidore discloses a similar lens wherein different regions of the dielectric comprise Dk values wherein the first Dk value is 2 {para. 0040, value equal or greater than 2…}, and the second Dk value is 4 {para. 0040, value equal to or greater than 3 and equal to or less than 5}.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date to combine the teachings of the references and make the lens of Jesme wherein: the first Dk value is 2, and the second Dk value is 4, as taught by Polidore, as a function of the operating frequency (para. 0040).
Regarding claim 9, Jesme discloses a lens {fig. 15} for use with a signal feed for shaping electromagnetic (EM) radiation energy originating from the signal feed when energized {Stepped GRIN lens 610}, the lens configured to operate at a defined center frequency (fc) having a free space wavelength (Xc) {para. 0098}, the lens comprising: a plurality of dielectric materials stacked side by side, wherein an adjacent one of the plurality of dielectric materials has a dielectric constant (Dk) value that is different from a Dk value of another adjacent one of the plurality of dielectric materials {para. 0099}, the plurality of dielectric materials having an overall footprint (a x b) in an x-y plane and an overall thickness (t) in a z-direction, of an orthogonal x-y-z coordinate system {see fig. 15}; wherein each cross-section of the plurality of dielectric materials in the x-y plane comprises each one of the plurality of dielectric materials {see fig. 15, u-v plane}; wherein each cross-section of the plurality of dielectric materials in one of; the x- z plane, and the y-z plane {see fig. 15, v-w plane}, comprises each one of the plurality of dielectric materials; wherein at least one cross-section of the plurality of dielectric materials in the other one of; the x-z plane, and the y-z plane, comprises only one of the plurality of dielectric materials {see fig. 15, u-w plane}.
Jesme does not disclose a first lens and a second lens, the second lens being stacked on top of the first lens such that the overall footprint (a x b) of the second lens overlays the overall footprint (a x b) of the first lens.
Furthermore, Jesme does not disclose the orthogonality of the claim such that the cross sections of each plane comprise different pluralities of the dielectric material as described.
However, Polidore discloses a dielectric lens comprising a three-dimensional body of dielectric material having a spatially varying dielectric constant {abstract}, and varies along three different rays having three different directions {para. 0006} from a common origin. Polidore further discloses that beam control may be provided relative to a horizontal axis, a vertical axis, or both {para. 0052}.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date to combine the teachings of the references and stack the GRIN lens of Jesme, orthogonally, such that the compound lens comprising: a first lens and a second lens, the second lens being stacked on top of the first lens, such that the overall footprint (a x b) of the second lens overlays the overall footprint (a x b) of the first lens, the compound lens comprising: a first lens and a second lens, the second lens being stacked on top of the first lens, such that the overall footprint (a x b) of the second lens overlays the overall footprint (a x b) of the first lens, wherein each of the first lens and the second lens comprises: a plurality of dielectric materials stacked side by side, wherein an adjacent one of the plurality of dielectric materials has a dielectric constant (Dk) value that is different from a Dk value of another adjacent one of the plurality of dielectric materials, the plurality of dielectric materials having an overall footprint (a x b) in 2 an x-y plane and an overall thickness (t) in a z-direction, of an orthogonal x-y-z coordinate system; wherein each cross-section of the plurality of dielectric materials in the x- y plane comprises each one of the plurality of dielectric materials; wherein each cross-section of the plurality of dielectric materials in one of; the x-z plane, and the y-z plane, comprises each one of the plurality of dielectric materials; wherein at least one cross-section of the plurality of dielectric materials in the other one of; the x-z plane, and the y-z plane, comprises only one of the plurality of dielectric materials, wherein in the first lens, each cross-section of the plurality of dielectric materials in the y-z plane comprises each one of the associated plurality of dielectric materials; wherein in the first lens, at least one cross-section of the plurality of dielectric materials in the x-z plane comprises only one of the associated plurality of dielectric materials, wherein in the second lens, each cross-section of the plurality of dielectric materials in the x-z plane comprises each one of the associated plurality of dielectric materials and wherein in the second lens, at least one cross-section of the plurality of dielectric materials in the y-z plane comprises only one of the associated plurality of dielectric materials, as suggested by the teachings of Polidore, to provide beam control in multiple directions {para. 0052}.
Regarding claim 10, Jesme and Polidore render obvious all limitations of base claim 9.
Jesme alone does not disclose wherein: the second lens has an identical side by side stack up of the plurality of dielectric materials as the first lens.
However, as previously discussed in claim 9, the modification of Jesme with Polidore, simply stacks the first lens on top again. Making the second lens a copy of the first lens, makeup wise.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date to combine the teachings of the references and make the modified lens of Jesme wherein: the second lens has an identical side by side stack up of the plurality of dielectric materials as the first lens, as suggested by the combination of Jesme and Polidore, to provide beam control in multiple directions {Polidore, para. 0052}.
Regarding claim 11, Jesme and Polidore render obvious all limitations of base claim 10.
Jesme also discloses wherein: the first lens and the second lens each have an odd number of the plurality of dielectric materials {para. 0099-0100}.
Regarding claim 12, Jesme and Polidore render obvious all limitations of base claim 11.
Jesme also discloses wherein: the plurality of dielectric materials of the first lens has mirror image symmetry in the x-z plane about the associated central one of the plurality of dielectric materials; the plurality of dielectric materials of the second lens has mirror image symmetry in the y-z plane about the associated central one of the plurality of dielectric materials {fig. 15, the symmetry is implicit in the second lens as well by nature of the earlier modification of stacking said lenses}.
Regarding claim 13, Jesme and Polidore render obvius all limitations of base claim 10.
Jesme does not specifically disclose wherein: each dielectric material of the plurality of dielectric materials of the first lens has a Dk value initially calculated according to the following equation and tuned thereafter based on desired performance characteristics:
ϕo – ϕi = 2π/λc*t*SQRT(Dkj);
where: ϕi is a known incoming phase angle of the EM radiation to the compound lens;
ϕo is a desired output phase angle if the EM radiation from the compound lens; Dkj is the Dk value of the jth dielectric material of the plurality of dielectric materials along the non-dominant field direction; λc is the free space wavelength of the compound lens when operating at the desired center frequency (fc); and t is the thickness of the plurality of dielectric materials in the z-direction.
However, the claimed equation merely represents the known relationship between phase delay through a dielectric material, free-space wavelength , thickness and the dielectric constant. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to initially calculate the dielectric constant values of Jesme’s dielectric materials using the known phase-delay relationship and then tune those values based on desired performance characteristics, as Jesme already teaches selecting and controlling effective dielectric constants according to a desired dielectric profile {table 1, para. 0094}.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date to combine the teachings of the references and make the modified lens of Jesme wherein: each dielectric material of the plurality of dielectric materials of the first lens has a Dk value initially calculated according to the following equation and tuned thereafter based on desired performance characteristics:
ϕo – ϕi = 2π/λc*t*SQRT(Dkj);
where: ϕi is a known incoming phase angle of the EM radiation to the compound lens;
ϕo is a desired output phase angle if the EM radiation from the compound lens; Dkj is the Dk value of the jth dielectric material of the plurality of dielectric materials along the non-dominant field direction; λc is the free space wavelength of the compound lens when operating at the desired center frequency (fc); and t is the thickness of the plurality of dielectric materials in the z-direction, in order to tune the lens based on desired performance {table 1 para. 0094}.
Claims 16 and 29 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jesme.
Regarding claim 16, Jesme anticipates all limitations of base claim 15.
Jesme does not specifically disclose wherein: the distance (d) is initially set equal to /2, and subsequently tuned to get an exact distance to achieve a desired phase center of the associated lens or compound lens, where the EM device is operational at the center frequency (fc) having an associated free space wavelength (Xc).
However, Jesme does disclose, in para. 0062, that EM waves lose their power proportionally to the square of the distance traveled. Therefore, it would have been obvious matter of design choice to have wherein: the distance (d) is initially set equal to /2, and subsequently tuned to get an exact distance to achieve a desired phase center of the associated lens or compound lens, where the EM device is operational at the center frequency (fc) having an associated free space wavelength (Xc), since 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 (CCPA 1980)
Regarding claim 29, Jesme anticipates all limitations of base claim 22.
Jesme also discloses wherein: each cross-section of the plurality of dielectric materials in the y-z plane comprises each one of the plurality of dielectric materials; and at least one cross-section of the plurality of dielectric materials in the x-z plane comprises only one of the plurality of dielectric materials (as discussed in claim 1, see fig. 15).
Jesme does not specifically disclose wherein: the slotted aperture is linearly aligned with the x-axis. However, this is merely a matter or orientation and it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date to make the device of Jesme wherein: the slotted aperture is linearly aligned with the x-axis in order to radiate in the preferred manner with relation to the lens orientation.
Claims 17-21, 25, 28, and 30-31 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jesme and further in view of Lafond et al. (US 20100134368 A1), herein referred to as Lafond.
Regarding claim 17, Jesme anticipates all limitations of base claim 15.
Jesme does not disclose further comprising: a dielectric spacer disposed between the signal feed and the associated lens or compound lens.
However, Lafond discloses a similar device with a feed and lens, further comprising: a dielectric spacer disposed between the signal feed and the associated lens or compound lens (para. 0043).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date to combine the teachings of the references and make the device of Jemse further comprising: a dielectric spacer disposed between the signal feed and the associated lens or compound lens, as taught by Lafond, to position the lens and source (para. 0043).
Regarding claim 18, Jesme and Lafond render obvious all limitations of base claim 17.
Jesme does not disclose wherein: the dielectric spacer is disposed on the signal feed; and the associated lens or compound lens is disposed on the dielectric spacer.
However, as described in claim 17, Lafond does disclose wherein: the dielectric spacer is disposed on the signal feed; and the associated lens or compound lens is disposed on the dielectric spacer {para. 0043, as the spacer is used specifically for positioning of the lens and source}.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date to combine the teachings of the references and make the modified device of Jesme wherein: the dielectric spacer is disposed on the signal feed; and the associated lens or compound lens is disposed on the dielectric spacer, as taught by Lafond, for positioning the lens and source (para. 0043).
Regarding claim 19, Jesme and Lafond render obvious all limitations of base claim 17.
Jesme does not disclose wherein: the dielectric spacer has a Dk value of greater than 1 and less than 1.5.
However, Lafond does disclose wherein: the dielectric spacer has a Dk value of greater than 1 and less than 1.5 {para. 0043, the dielectric is meant to approximate air, which is about 1}.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date to combine the teachings of the references and make the modified device of Jesme wherein: the dielectric spacer has a Dk value of greater than 1 and less than 1.5, as taught by Lafond, to approximate the dielectric permittivity of air (para. 0043).
Regarding claim 20, Jesme and Lafond render obvious all limitations of base claim 17.
Jesme does not disclose further comprising: a dielectric encapsulant disposed over and fixturing the lens or compound lens to the dielectric spacer and signal feed.
However, the system of Lafond discloses a similar dielectric encapsulant (102), used for positioning and holding the lens and feeds (para. 0130). A person of ordinary skill in the art would find it obvious to modify the encapsulant of Lafond and dispose over and fixturing the lens to the dielectric space and signal feed.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date to combine the teachings of the references and make the modified device of Jesme further comprising: a dielectric encapsulant disposed over and fixturing the lens or compound lens to the dielectric spacer and signal feed, as suggested by the teachings of Lafond, to surround the system and keep all components at predetermined points (para. 0130).
Regarding claim 21, Jesme and Lafond render obvious all limitations of base claim 20.
Jesme does not disclose wherein: the dielectric encapsulant has a Dk value of greater than 1 and less than 1.5.
However, Lafond does disclose wherein: the dielectric encapsulant has a Dk value of greater than 1 and less than 1.5 (para. 0129, approximates the dielectric constant of air, which is approximately 1).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date to combine the teachings of the references and make the modified device of Jesme wherein: the dielectric encapsulant has a Dk value of greater than 1 and less than 1.5, as taught by Lafond, to approximate the dielectric permittivity of air (para. 0129).
Regarding claim 25, Jesme anticipates all limitations of base claim 14.
Jesme does not disclose wherein: the signal feed comprises a patch antenna comprising a signal line that passes through a ground plane and a dielectric substrate disposed on the ground plane, and a conductive patch disposed on the dielectric substrate, the signal line being disposed in electrical communication with the conductive patch.
However, Lafond discloses a similar antenna wherein the signal feed comprises a patch antenna (fig. 7a, 7b) comprising a signal line (73) that passes through a ground plane (75) and a dielectric substrate (72, 77) disposed on the ground plane, and a conductive patch (71) disposed on the dielectric substrate, the signal line being disposed in electrical communication with the conductive patch (fig. 7a).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date to combine the teachings of the references and make the device of Jesme wherein: the signal feed comprises a patch antenna comprising a signal line that passes through a ground plane and a dielectric substrate disposed on the ground plane, and a conductive patch disposed on the dielectric substrate, the signal line being disposed in electrical communication with the conductive patch, as taught by Lafond, to reduce dielectric loss (para. 0114).
Regarding claim 28, Jesme and Lafond render obvious all limitations of base claim 25.
Jesme also discloses wherein: the overall footprint (a x b) of the associated lens or compound lens overlays the patch antenna, which comprises the signal line, the conductive patch, at least that portion of the dielectric substrate beneath the conductive patch, and a corresponding portion of the ground plane (see fig. 3 of Jesme, wherein the overall footprint of the associated lens clearly overlays the totality of the feed system, which in the modified device includes the further comprising components).
Regarding claim 30, Jesme and Lafond render obvious all limitations of base claim 25.
Jesme does not disclose wherein: a signal line to the patch is configured to produce an electric field (E-field) that is linearly aligned with the y-axis; each cross-section of the plurality of dielectric materials in the x-z plane comprises each one of the plurality of dielectric materials; and at least one cross-section of the plurality of dielectric materials in the y-z plane comprises only one of the plurality of dielectric materials.
However, changing the polarization of a patch antenna is well known in the art, as shown in that Lafond discloses that it is merely a matter or orienting the feed line to the patch feed to create different polarizations (para. 0124-0125, fig. 7a, 8, 9).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date to combine the teachings of the references and make the modified device of Jesme wherein: a signal line to the patch is configured to produce an electric field (E-field) that is linearly aligned with the y-axis; each cross-section of the plurality of dielectric materials in the x-z plane comprises each one of the plurality of dielectric materials; and at least one cross-section of the plurality of dielectric materials in the y-z plane comprises only one of the plurality of dielectric materials, as taught by Lafond, to excite in different modes (para. 0125).
Regarding claim 31, Jesme and Lafond render obvious all limitations of base claim 25.
Jesme does not disclose wherein: a signal line to the patch is configured to produce an electric field (E-field) that is linearly aligned with the y-axis; each cross-section of the plurality of dielectric materials in the y-z plane comprises each one of the plurality of dielectric materials; and at least one cross-section of the plurality of dielectric materials in the x-z plane comprises only one of the plurality of dielectric materials.
However, changing the polarization of a patch antenna is well known in the art, as shown in that Lafond discloses that it is merely a matter or orienting the feed line to the patch feed to create different polarizations (para. 0124-0125, fig. 7a, 8, 9).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date to combine the teachings of the references and make the modified device of Jesme wherein: a signal line to the patch is configured to produce an electric field (E-field) that is linearly aligned with the y-axis; each cross-section of the plurality of dielectric materials in the y-z plane comprises each one of the plurality of dielectric materials; and at least one cross-section of the plurality of dielectric materials in the x-z plane comprises only one of the plurality of dielectric materials, as taught by Lafond, to excite in different modes (para. 0125).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to BRANDON S WOODS whose telephone number is (571)270-1525. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8:30 am - 6:00 pm.
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.
/BRANDON SEAN WOODS/Examiner, Art Unit 2845
/ALEXANDER H TANINGCO/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2845
Prosecution Insights