CTNF 19/101,904 CTNF 90257 Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status 07-03-aia AIA 15-10-aia The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA. Specification 07-29 AIA The disclosure is objected to because of the following informalities: Par. 0012 and 0143 of the specification recite in part “(i is 1 or more and N or less)”; and Par. 0138 recites in part “i in the i-th pair of antenna elements is an integer of 1 or more and N or less”; however, it is unclear what is the value of i if it is not 1 or more due to the language “and N or less” . Appropriate correction is required. Claim Objections Claims 5 & 6 are objected to because of the following informalities: Claim 5 recites the term “an FMCW method” in the 4 th line, however, the claim should clarify that it is a frequency modulation continuous wave method consistent with the specification. Appropriate correction is required. Dependent claim 6 is likewise objected to. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112 07-30-02 AIA 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. 07-34-01 Claim 2 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 2 recites the limitation “(i is 1 or more and N or less)” however, it is unclear what is the value of i if it is not 1 or more due to the language “and N or less” which renders the claim indefinite. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102 07-06 AIA 15-10-15 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. 07-07-aia AIA 07-07 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 – 07-08-aia AIA (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. 07-15 AIA Claim 1 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102( a)(1 ) as being anticipated by Nagai US Patent 3,731,313 (cited by applicant) . Regarding Claim 1 , Nagai teaches a retroreflective antenna (Figs. 2-5) comprising: an antenna main body for retroreflecting incoming radio waves (Abstract, Figs. 2, 5); and a passive notch filter (stubs / traps 11, 12, 13 Fig. 2 Col. 2 L 21 / 11L, 11R, 12L, 12R, 13L, 13R Fig. 5 Col. 5 L. 50, Abstract), wherein the antenna main body includes a plurality of pairs of antenna elements (1Lb, 1Rb, 2Lb, 2Rb, 3Lb, 3Rb Figs. 2, 5 Col. 2 L. 11), and a plurality of transmission lines provided corresponding to the plurality of pairs of antenna elements (1b-1b, 2b-2b, 3b-3b Figs. 2, 5 Col. 2 L. 16), each pair of antenna elements in the plurality of pairs of antenna elements is disposed point-symmetrically with respect to a reference point in the antenna main body (“every two of said elements being disposed in a symmetrical relationship with respect to the center of said antenna array” Claim 1, Figs. 2, 5), each of the plurality of transmission lines connects corresponding pair of antenna elements among the plurality of pairs of antenna elements (Figs. 2, 5), electrical lengths of the plurality of transmission lines are the same (“substantially equal length” Col. 2 L. 16-17), and the passive notch filter is provided in at least one transmission line among the plurality of transmission lines (Figs. 2, 5) . Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103 07-20-aia AIA 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. 07-23-aia AIA 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. 07-21-aia AIA Claim s 3 & 4 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nagai US Patent 3,731,313 (cited by applicant) . Regarding Claim 3 , Nagai teaches wherein a plurality of the passive notch filters are included (stubs / traps 11, 12, 13 Fig. 2 Col. 2 L 21 / 11L, 11R, 12L, 12R, 13L, 13R Fig. 5 Col. 5 L. 50, Abstract), a number of the plurality of passive notch filters is the same as a number of the plurality of transmission lines (Figs. 2, 5), and each transmission line included in the plurality of transmission lines is provided with each passive notch filter included in the plurality of passive notch filters (Figs. 2, 5). Nagai is silent on frequencies cut by the plurality of passive notch filters are the same. However, Nagai teaches “impedance matching stubs having an adjustable length are connected to substantially the center of respective feeders in order to enable incoming electromagnetic waves to be reradiated either straight backward or in an opposite direction to that in which they are receiving, with respect to the antenna boresight, without changing the characteristic impedance of feeders” (Abstract); and teaches adjusting the lengths of the stubs (Col. 3 L. 12-Col. 5 L. 38). In this particular case, adjusting the passive notch filters to obtain characteristics such as frequencies cut is common and well known in the antenna art as evident by Nagai based on the frequency band of operation. Accordingly, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to provide the frequencies cut by the plurality of passive notch filters to be the same based on the teachings of Nagai as a result effect based on the frequency band of operation of the antenna. Regarding Claim 4 , Nagai teaches wherein a plurality of notch filter groups are included (stubs / traps 11L, 11R, 12L, 12R, 13L, 13R Fig. 5 Col. 5 L. 50, Abstract), each notch filter group in the plurality of notch filter groups includes a plurality of the passive notch filters (Fig. 5), a number of the plurality of notch filter groups is the same as a number of the plurality of transmission lines (Fig. 5), and each notch filter group in the plurality of notch filter groups is provided in each transmission line in the plurality of transmission lines (Fig. 5). Nagai is silent on a plurality of the passive notch filters configured to cut different frequencies. However, Nagai teaches “impedance matching stubs having an adjustable length are connected to substantially the center of respective feeders in order to enable incoming electromagnetic waves to be reradiated either straight backward or in an opposite direction to that in which they are receiving, with respect to the antenna boresight, without changing the characteristic impedance of feeders” (Abstract); and teaches adjusting the lengths of the stubs (Col. 3 L. 12-Col. 5 L. 38). In this particular case, adjusting the passive notch filters to obtain characteristics such as frequencies cut is common and well known in the antenna art as evident by Nagai based on the frequency band of operation. Accordingly, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to provide the frequencies cut by the plurality of passive notch filters to be the different based on the teachings of Nagai as a result effect based on the different frequency bands of operation of the antenna . 07-21-aia AIA Claim 2 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nagai US Patent 3,731,313 (cited by applicant) and Ueda US Patent Application Publication 2022/0115790 . Regarding Claim 2 , Nagai teaches wherein the plurality of pairs of antenna elements include a first antenna element group (1Lb, 1Rb Figs. 2, 5 Col. 2 L. 11), a second antenna element group (2Lb, 2Rb Figs. 2, 5 Col. 2 L. 11), and a third antenna element group (3Lb, 3Rb Figs. 2, 5 Col. 2 L. 11), each of the first antenna element group, the second antenna element group, and the third antenna element group includes N (N is an integer of 1 or more) pairs of antenna elements (1 pair Figs. 2, 5), and when one of the N pairs of antenna elements in each of the first antenna element group, the second antenna element group, and the third antenna element group is defined as an i-th pair of antenna elements (i is 1 or more and N or less) (1 Figs. 2, 5). Nagai is silent on the i-th pair of antenna elements in the second antenna element group are disposed at positions obtained by rotating the i-th pair of antenna elements in the first antenna element group by 120 degrees about a predetermined direction of the reference point, and the i-th pair of antenna elements in the third antenna element group are disposed at positions obtained by rotating the i-th pair of antenna elements in the first antenna element group by 240 degrees about the predetermined direction of the reference point. However, Ueda teaches rotating groups of antennas by about 120° and about 240° (Par. 0052, 0066 Figs. 3, 5B). In this particular case, rotating the i-th pair of antenna elements in the first antenna element group by 120 degrees about a predetermined direction of the reference point, and rotating the i-th pair of antenna elements in the first antenna element group by 240 degrees about the predetermined direction of the reference point is common and well known in the antenna art as evident by Ueda to provide sufficient gain and improve axial ratio (Par. 0055-0056). Accordingly, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to rotate the i-th pair of antenna elements in the first antenna element group of Nagai by 120 degrees about a predetermined direction of the reference point, and rotate the i-th pair of antenna elements in the first antenna element group of Nagai by 240 degrees about the predetermined direction of the reference point based on the teachings of Ueda as a result effect in order to provide sufficient gain and improve axial ratio . 07-21-aia AIA Claim s 5 & 6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nagai US Patent 3,731,313 (cited by applicant) and Sasaki et al. US Patent 5,815,112 . Regarding Claim 5 , Nagai teaches an object detecting system comprising: a retroreflective antenna attached to an object (implied from “Van-Atta array antenna device which can be mounted on artificial space satellites for communication with other artificial satellites or ground stations or can be utilized as dummy objects in radar systems” Col. 1 L. 9-16) and being the retroreflective antenna according to claim 1 (as shown in the rejection above); and a radar device (Col. 1 L. 9-16) configured to transmit radio waves and receive the radio waves retroreflected by the retroreflective antenna (Abstract), wherein a frequency cut by the passive notch filter included in the retroreflective antenna is a frequency within a frequency band of the radio waves (implied with operating frequency band from “impedance matching stubs having an adjustable length are connected to substantially the center of respective feeders in order to enable incoming electromagnetic waves to be reradiated either straight backward or in an opposite direction to that in which they are receiving, with respect to the antenna boresight, without changing the characteristic impedance of feeders” Abstract). Nagai is silent radio waves modulated by an FMCW method. However, Sasaki et al. teaches “the radar system of this embodiment functions as an FM-CW (frequency-modulated continuous wave) radar” (Col. 5 L. 30-32); and “Through this frequency analysis, ECU 20, as an FM-CW radar, calculates or measures the distance of the target reflected the transmission radio wave as well as the relative velocity of the target” Col. 9 L. 16-20; “Furthermore, to function as an FM-CW radar, the radar system of the first embodiment, detects the distance and the relative velocity of the target in addition to the direction of the target. This is advantageous to increase the accuracy in the collision judgement and to enhance the driving safety of the automotive vehicle.” Col. 10 L. 6-11. In this particular case, modulating by an FMCW method is common and well known in the antenna art as evident by Sasaki et al. in order to detect the distance and the relative velocity of the target as well as the direction of the target. Accordingly, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to configure the radio waves of Nagai to be modulated by an FMCW method based on the teachings of Sasaki et al. in order to detect the distance and the relative velocity of the target as well as the direction of the target. Regarding Claim 6 , Nagai as modified teaches wherein a plurality of notch filter groups are included (stubs / traps 11L, 11R, 12L, 12R, 13L, 13R Fig. 5 Col. 5 L. 50, Abstract), each notch filter group in the plurality of notch filter groups includes a plurality of the passive notch filters (Fig. 5), a number of the plurality of notch filter groups is the same as a number of the plurality of transmission lines (Fig. 5), and each notch filter group in the plurality of notch filter groups is provided in each transmission line in the plurality of transmission lines (Fig. 5). Nagai is silent on a plurality of the passive notch filters configured to cut different frequencies. However, Nagai teaches “impedance matching stubs having an adjustable length are connected to substantially the center of respective feeders in order to enable incoming electromagnetic waves to be reradiated either straight backward or in an opposite direction to that in which they are receiving, with respect to the antenna boresight, without changing the characteristic impedance of feeders” (Abstract); and teaches adjusting the lengths of the stubs (Col. 3 L. 12-Col. 5 L. 38). In this particular case, adjusting the passive notch filters to obtain characteristics such as frequencies cut is common and well known in the antenna art as evident by Nagai based on the frequency band of operation. Accordingly, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to provide the frequencies cut by the plurality of passive notch filters to be the different based on the teachings of Nagai as a result effect based on the different frequency bands of operation of the antenna. 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 Application/Control Number: 19/101,904 Page 2 Art Unit: 2845 Application/Control Number: 19/101,904 Page 3 Art Unit: 2845 Application/Control Number: 19/101,904 Page 4 Art Unit: 2845 Application/Control Number: 19/101,904 Page 6 Art Unit: 2845 Application/Control Number: 19/101,904 Page 7 Art Unit: 2845 Application/Control Number: 19/101,904 Page 8 Art Unit: 2845 Application/Control Number: 19/101,904 Page 9 Art Unit: 2845 Application/Control Number: 19/101,904 Page 10 Art Unit: 2845 Application/Control Number: 19/101,904 Page 11 Art Unit: 2845
Prosecution Insights