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 .
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted is being considered by the examiner.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112:
The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention.
Claim 1 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 112(a) as failing to comply with the written description requirement.
The specification as filed describes the invention as an antenna device which is "compact, light, and has a large range of transmittable/receivable beam axes" (specification, page 1, lines 23-25). The specification further states at page 5, lines 10-11 that "hollow waveguides are formed within the respective modules. Since hollow waveguides are provided, the configuration of the antenna device may be made more compact." It is therefore apparent from the specification that the hollow waveguides formed within the plate-shaped modules are essential to achieving the compact and lightweight configuration that is the stated objective of the invention.
However, claim 1 as amended does not recite hollow waveguides. Claim 1 is therefore directed to subject matter broader than what applicant has described as the invention in the specification. A person of ordinary skill in the art would not recognize from the specification that applicant was in possession of an antenna device of the type recited in claim 1 without hollow waveguides, as the specification consistently describes the hollow waveguides as the structural feature that enables the compact configuration of the invention.
Applicant is required to amend claim 1 to incorporate the hollow waveguide limitation, as recited in current claim 5, to bring claim 1 into conformance with the written description requirement of 35 U.S.C. § 112(a). Such amendment would also serve to establish patentable distinction over the applied prior art references as rejected in the art sections, none of which disclose hollow waveguides formed within and integral to stacked plate-shaped modules connecting a coupling side-surface to a transmission side-surface.
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 1-4 and 8-14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Eiges (US 2002/0163480 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Eiges discloses an antenna device (antenna sub-unit 20, Fig. 1) for transmission and reception of microwaves with controllable multi-beam directionality (abstract: "electronically steered array antenna"), comprising:
a base body (antenna sub-unit 20, Fig. 1, paragraph [0053]: "Antenna sub-unit 20 typically includes a plurality of linearly arrayed half-ring antenna segments 24, mounted adjacently"), which comprises at least one plate-shaped module as a first type (antenna segment 24, Fig. 1, first module in the stack) and at least one further plate-shaped module as a second type (antenna segment 24, Fig. 1, second module in the stack), the first module(s) and the second module(s) being stacked on top of one another (paragraph [0053]: "stacking of identical antenna segments side by side") and their end faces taken together defining side-surfaces of the base body (Fig. 1, the radiating surfaces of segments 24 taken together define the cylindrical surface of the antenna sub-unit), wherein:
each module (antenna segment 24) comprises at least one transmission side-surface (the arc surface of each segment 24 bearing radiating elements 28, Fig. 1) as an end face thereof (Fig. 1, the curved surface of each half-ring segment constitutes an end face);
each transmission side-surface of each module comprises a plurality of antenna elements (radiating elements 28, paragraph [0053]: "Each antenna segment 24 includes a convex arc array 26 of vertically and horizontally-fed radiating elements 28");
the first module(s) and the second module(s) are arranged such that one transmission side-surface of the first module(s) is part of a first side-surface of the base body and one transmission side-surface of the second module(s) is part of a second side-surface of the base body, the first and second side-surfaces of the base body being different (Fig. 1, examiner's annotated figure in the WO-ISA indicating 1st, 2nd, and 3rd transmission side-surfaces on different side-surfaces of the base body; paragraph [0053]: segments mounted adjacently with radiating elements on different portions of the cylindrical surface); and
each transmission side-surface of each module defines, via its antenna elements, an antenna array (antenna arc array 26, paragraph [0053]: "Arc-array elements 28 of all convex arc arrays 26 form together a cylindrical array 32").
Regarding claim 2, Eiges further discloses that a plurality of the antenna elements (radiating elements 28, Fig. 7) of each module are arranged in a line so as to define a row of antenna elements (paragraph [0077]: "radiating array 32 of antenna unit 120 is partitioned into rows 1 to N"), and in a case of at least two modules of at least one single type, columns of antenna elements so as to define an antenna matrix array (Figs. 1 and 8: multiple segments stacked side by side with rows and columns of radiating elements 28 forming matrix array 32).
Regarding claim 3, Eiges further discloses that each module (antenna segment 24) further comprises a coupling side-surface (the surface coupled to the azimuth power combiner 26, Fig. 1) as another end face thereof, and wherein each coupling side-surface of each module comprises a plurality of coupling ports (coupling ports from the lens 50a/50b to the switch module 54, Fig. 5, coupling ports from lens).
Regarding claim 4, Eiges further discloses that the coupling side-surfaces of the modules are part of a same third side-surface of the base body (Fig. 1: the side of the antenna segments coupled to the azimuth power combiner 26 constitutes a common third side surface).
Regarding claims 8-10, Eiges further discloses a signal distribution network (Fig. 8: azimuth power combiner 26, switch modules 54a, complex weighting module 56a) comprising a plurality of network ports (the ports connected between switch module 54a and the lens 50a, Fig. 8), each network port being connected to one coupling port, wherein the signal distribution network comprises at least one switch element (switch module 54a, Fig. 5) respectively configured to switch at least one network port, and wherein the signal distribution network comprises a bidirectional frontend (complex weighting module 56a, Fig. 8) connected to the network ports and configured to phase-shift a signal between the network ports so as to control beam directionality (paragraph [0067]-[0068]: phase control for azimuth beam steering).
Regarding claim 11, Eiges further discloses that the number of coupling ports and the number of antenna elements are not equal (Fig. 8: switch module 54a has SPNT configuration connecting N lens beams to a smaller number of output ports, paragraph [0065]).
Regarding claim 12, Eiges further discloses that a shortest distance between two antenna elements of one module and/or a shortest distance between two antenna elements of multiple modules of the same type is substantially λ/2 (paragraph [0057]: "radius of each lens 50 should match the radius R of cylindrical array 32 in accordance with standard designs of lens-fed circular arrays," implying standard half-wavelength spacing).
Regarding claim 13, Eiges further discloses that the antenna device further comprises at least one further plate-shaped module as a third or more type (Fig. 1, examiner annotation indicating 1st, 2nd, and 3rd modules), wherein each type of module comprises a respective transmission side-surface, and all types of modules are arranged such that their transmission side-surfaces are part of different side-surfaces of the base body (Fig. 1: three different transmission side-surfaces on three different sides of the base body).
Regarding claim 14, Eiges further discloses that the antenna device is fitted on an airplane fuselage (paragraph [0048]: "FIG. 10 is a schematic diagram that describes the use of imaging plates externally fitted on an airplane fuselage, in juxtaposition to a top-mounted ray imaging antenna"; Fig. 10: antenna sub-unit 20 mounted on airplane).
Claims 1-4 and 8-14 are alternatively rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Yehezkely (US 2013/0293420 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Yehezkely discloses an antenna device (RF module 300, Figs. 3-6) for transmission and reception of microwaves with controllable multi-beam directionality (abstract: "each configured to radiate millimeter-wave signals at a different direction"), comprising:
a base body (multilayer substrate 310, Fig. 4), which comprises at least one plate-shaped module as a first type (layer 412, Fig. 4: each layer of the substrate is a plate-shaped module) and at least one further plate-shaped module as a second type (layer 413, Fig. 4), the first module(s) and the second module(s) being stacked on top of one another (Fig. 4: layers 411-416 stacked) and their end faces taken together defining side-surfaces of the base body (Figs. 3-4: layers 411 and 416 are top and bottom end faces; layers 412-415 define side faces), wherein:
each module (layer) comprises at least one transmission side-surface (Fig. 4: each of layers 412-415 has antenna sub-arrays 423-426 radiating through sides 301-304) as an end face thereof (Fig. 4: the side edge of each middle layer constitutes an end face);
each transmission side-surface of each module comprises a plurality of antenna elements (antenna sub-arrays 423-426 comprising radiating elements 610, paragraph [0035]);
the first module(s) and the second module(s) are arranged such that one transmission side-surface of the first module(s) is part of a first side-surface of the base body (layer 412 sub-array 424 radiating through side 301) and one transmission side-surface of the second module(s) is part of a second side-surface of the base body (layer 413 sub-array 423 radiating through side 302, Fig. 4), the first and second side-surfaces of the base body being different (sides 301 and 302 are different sides of the module 300, Fig. 3); and
each transmission side-surface of each module defines, via its antenna elements, an antenna array (antenna sub-arrays 421-426, paragraph [0024]).
Regarding claim 2, Yehezkely further discloses that a plurality of the antenna elements of each module are arranged in a line to define a row of antenna elements (paragraph [0033]: "antenna sub-array 422 includes N radiating elements arranged in two rows"), and define an antenna matrix array (Figs. 2, 4, and 6: antenna sub-arrays arranged in matrix configurations).
Regarding claims 3 and 4, Yehezkely discloses that the coupling side-surfaces of all modules are part of a same third side-surface of the base body (Figs. 3B and 3C: all antenna sub-arrays share common coupling connection to RF circuitry 440 on the same side of the substrate).
Regarding claims 8-14, Yehezkely further discloses the subject matter of these claims as mapped to the signal distribution network (RF circuitry 440, paragraph [0031]), switch elements, matrix array arrangement, element spacing of half to full wavelength (paragraph [0033]), third type modules, and aircraft/vehicle mounting (paragraph [0026]).
Claims 1-4 and 8-14 are alternatively rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Zhang et al. (US 2022/0059935 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Zhang discloses an antenna device (integrated antenna assembly 250, Figs. 2A-3E) for transmission and reception of microwaves with controllable multi-beam directionality, comprising a base body with plate-shaped modules of first and second types (Figs. 4A-4B: IAAs 250A and 250B mounted on opposing sides of panel 412), stacked and arranged such that their transmission side-surfaces are part of different side-surfaces of the base body (Figs. 4A-4B, 5, 6: multiple IAAs facing different directions), wherein each transmission side-surface has a plurality of antenna elements defining an antenna array (array 218 of antenna elements 302, Fig. 3A). It follows that the subject matter of independent claim 1 is also disclosed by Figs. 4A and 4B of Zhang (paragraph [1.3] of the WO-ISA, confirmed by the full reference).
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.
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 5-7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable over Eiges (US 2002/0163480 A1, Eiges) in view of Zhang (US 2022/0059935 A1, Zhang et al.).
Regarding claim 5, Eiges discloses the subject matter of claims 1-4 as set forth above. Eiges does not explicitly disclose that each module comprises a plurality of hollow waveguides connecting the coupling side-surface with the transmission side-surface.
Zhang discloses the use of waveguide structures to connect coupling ports to antenna elements in a multi-beam antenna assembly for aircraft applications (Zhang, paragraph [0045]: Rotman lenses use a geometrically configured waveguide to passively shift the phase of inputs into a linear antenna array).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to implement hollow waveguides within the plate-shaped modules of Eiges to connect the coupling side-surface to the transmission side-surface, as taught by Zhang, since it is desirable to achieve a more compact antenna configuration, and Zhang teaches that waveguides used in combination with lens-based beamforming networks enable such compact configurations in multi-beam antenna assemblies for aircraft platforms (Zhang, paragraphs [0029]-[0030] and [0045]).
Regarding claim 6, Eiges discloses an elevation beamforming assembly 30 connected to the antenna elements of each module (Eiges, Fig. 2, paragraph [0054]). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to implement the beamforming network of Eiges as a Rotman lens, Ruze lens, Luneberg lens, or Butler matrix connected to the hollow waveguides, since it is desirable to achieve passive beamforming without active phase control circuitry, and Eiges itself teaches that the power combiner may be selected from "a Ruze-type lens, a Rotman-type lens, and any combination thereof" (Eiges, paragraph [0014]), and Zhang further teaches that a Rotman lens provides passive beamforming suitable for environmentally challenging aircraft applications (Zhang, abstract and paragraph [0030]).
Regarding claim 7, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to configure the hollow waveguides of the combination of Eiges and Zhang such that the electric path length of at least two hollow waveguides between the coupling side-surface and the transmission side-surface differs between one another, since it is desirable to achieve beam scanning capability across multiple directions, and Zhang teaches that different path lengths between coupling ports and antenna elements are what enable the Rotman lens to achieve time-delay based beam scanning without beam squint (Zhang, paragraphs [0045]-[0046]).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MONICA C KING whose telephone number is (571)270-3429. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri.
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, Alexander H. Taningco can be reached at (571) 272-8048. 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.
/MONICA C KING/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2844
6/13/2026
Prosecution Insights