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 March 27, 2025. The submission is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Specification
Applicant is reminded of the proper language and format for an abstract of the disclosure.
The abstract should be in narrative form and generally limited to a single paragraph on a separate sheet within the range of 50 to 150 words in length. The abstract should describe the disclosure sufficiently to assist readers in deciding whether there is a need for consulting the full patent text for details.
The language should be clear and concise and should not repeat information given in the title. It should avoid using phrases which can be implied, such as, “The disclosure concerns,” “The disclosure defined by this invention,” “The disclosure describes,” etc. In addition, the form and legal phraseology often used in patent claims, such as “means” and “said,” should be avoided.
The abstract of the disclosure is objected to because inclusion of legal phraseology. A corrected abstract of the disclosure is required and must be presented on a separate sheet, apart from any other text. See MPEP § 608.01(b).
Drawings
The drawings are objected to as failing to comply with 37 CFR 1.84(p)(5) because they include the following reference character(s) not mentioned in the description: 33, 53, 54, 66, 67, and 76. Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d), or amendment to the specification to add the reference character(s) in the description in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(b) 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. 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.
Claim Objections
Claims 1-4 and 12 are objected to because of the following informalities:
In claims 1-3, “the antenna array” lacks proper antecedent basis and should read “the reconfigurable antenna array”
In claim 3, “the variation networks” lacks proper antecedent basis and should read “the plurality of parallel variation networks”
In claim 4, “the each at least one variation network” is improper and should read “the at least one variation network”
In claim 12, “the apertures” lacks proper antecedent basis and should read “the periodic pattern of apertures”
Appropriate correction is required.
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.
Claims 1-20 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 applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
The claims are generally narrative and indefinite, failing to conform with current U.S. practice. They are replete with grammatical and idiomatic errors.
Claim 1 recites the limitation "the unit cell" in line 5. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. It is unclear which previous “unit cell” is being referenced.
Claim 1 recites the limitation “each waveguide feed structure" in line 8. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. It is unclear which previous “waveguide feed structure” or “a plurality of waveguide feed structures” is being referenced.
Claim 1 recites the limitation “the RF signals of the channel" in line 9. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 1 recites the limitation “the waveguide structure " in line 9. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 1 recites the limitation “the unit cells of the waveguide feed structure" in lines 9-10. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 1 recites the limitation “the RF signals" in line 12. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 1 recites the limitation “the respective waveguide structure" in line 9. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 2 recites the limitation “the RF signals" in line 3. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 3 recites the limitation “the RF signals" in line 3. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 4 recites the limitation “an RF signal passing therethrough" in line 3. It is unclear what “therethrough” is referring to.
Claim 5 recites the limitation “combinations thereof" in line 4. It is unclear what “thereof” is referring to.
Claim 6 recites the limitation “multiple channels" in line 4. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. It is unclear if this limitation is referring to the previous “multiple channels” or a new limitation.
Claim 6 recites the limitation “different channels" in line 4. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. It is unclear if this limitation is referring to the previous “different channels” or a new limitation.
Claim 7 recites the limitation “each waveguide feed structure" in line 2. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. It is unclear which previous “waveguide feed structure” or “a plurality of waveguide feed structures” is being referenced.
Claim 8 recites the limitation “the waveguide feed structure" in line 9. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
The term “substantially” in claim 8 is a relative term which renders the claim indefinite. The term “substantially” is not defined by the claim, the specification does not provide a standard for ascertaining the requisite degree, and one of ordinary skill in the art would not be reasonably apprised of the scope of the invention. The term modifies the limitation “linear cavity” and renders it indefinite.
The term “substantially” in claims 9-10 is a relative term which renders the claim indefinite. The term “substantially” is not defined by the claim, the specification does not provide a standard for ascertaining the requisite degree, and one of ordinary skill in the art would not be reasonably apprised of the scope of the invention. The term modifies the limitation “parallel metallic side walls” and renders it indefinite.
The term “substantially” in claim 9 is a relative term which renders the claim indefinite. The term “substantially” is not defined by the claim, the specification does not provide a standard for ascertaining the requisite degree, and one of ordinary skill in the art would not be reasonably apprised of the scope of the invention. The term modifies the limitation “perpendicular” and renders it indefinite.
Regarding claim 10, the phrase "optionally" renders the claim indefinite because it is unclear whether the limitations following the phrase are part of the claimed invention. See MPEP § 2173.05(d).
Claim 11 recites the limitation “each waveguide feed structure" in lines 2-3. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. It is unclear which previous “waveguide feed structure” or “a plurality of waveguide feed structures” is being referenced.
Claim 12 recites the limitation “the unit cells" in line 2. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. It is unclear which previous “unit cells” the limitation is referring to.
Claim 13 recites the limitation “the unit cells" in line 2. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. It is unclear which previous “unit cells” the limitation is referring to.
Claim 14 recites the limitation “the unit cells" in line 2. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. It is unclear which previous “unit cells” the limitation is referring to.
Claim 15 recites the limitation “the unit cells" in line 2. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. It is unclear which previous “unit cells” the limitation is referring to.
Claim 16 recites the limitation “the unit cells" in line 2. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. It is unclear which previous “unit cells” the limitation is referring to.
Claim 17 recites the limitation “the RF signals" in line 2. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. It is unclear which previous “RF signals” the limitation is referring to.
Claim 18 recites the limitation “the waveguide feed structures" in line 2. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
The term “substantially” in claim 18 is a relative term which renders the claim indefinite. The term “substantially” is not defined by the claim, the specification does not provide a standard for ascertaining the requisite degree, and one of ordinary skill in the art would not be reasonably apprised of the scope of the invention. The term modifies the limitation “parallel” and renders it indefinite.
Claim 20 recites the limitation “RF signals" in line 2. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. It is unclear if this limitation is referring to a previous “RF signals” or a new limitation.
Claim 19 inherits the deficiencies of claim 18.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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)(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 1-9, 12-13, and 16-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Achour et al. (US PGPUB 2019/0326684 A1), hereinafter known as Achour.
Regarding claim 1, Achour discloses (Fig. 1-3) A reconfigurable antenna array (100) comprising: a radio frequency, RF, feed, configured to receive RF signals from an RF source (Fig. 2; [0024]); a plurality of waveguide feed structures (124), each waveguide feed structure comprising a plurality of unit cells arranged end-to-end (124), each unit cell configured to transmit RF signals out of the unit cell ([0040]); and an RF power distributor (120), operatively connected to said RF feed, configured to split the received RF signals into multiple channels and to allocate different channels to different respective waveguide feed structures (124), wherein each waveguide feed structure (124) is configured to guide the RF signals of the channel allocated to the waveguide structure to the unit cells of the waveguide feed structure (124); wherein each unit cell comprises reconfigurable components configured to manipulate electromagnetic properties of the RF signals received by the RF feed and guided along the respective waveguide structure so as to control a radiation pattern of the antenna array ([0061] and [0063]-[0064]).
Regarding claim 2, Achour further discloses (Fig. 7) further comprising at least one variation network (706) between the RF feed and the plurality of waveguide feed structures, wherein adjustment of the at least one variation network modifies properties of the RF signals so as to provide further control of the radiation pattern of the antenna array ([0059]).
Regarding claim 3, Achour further discloses (Fig. 7) further comprising a plurality of parallel variation networks (706) between the RF feed and the plurality of waveguide feed structures, wherein adjustment of the variation networks modifies properties of the RF signals so as to provide further control of the radiation pattern of the antenna array ([0059]).
Regarding claim 4, Achour further discloses (Fig. 7) wherein the each at least one variation network (706) is configurable to change a phase, or an amplitude, or both a phase and an amplitude, of an RF signal passing therethrough ([0059]).
Regarding claim 5, Achour further discloses (Fig. 7) wherein the at least one variation network (706) comprises at least one component selected from: phase shifters, attenuators, RF switches, power amplifiers ([0059]), low-noise amplifiers and combinations thereof.
Regarding claim 6, Achour further discloses (Fig. 2 and 7) further comprising an additional RF power distributor (120; [0059]), operatively connected between the RF feed (Input Signal) and the plurality of parallel variation networks (706), configured to split the received RF signals into multiple channels and to allocate different channels to different respective variation networks of the plurality of parallel variation networks ([0059]).
Regarding claim 7, Achour further discloses (Fig. 2 and 7) wherein each waveguide feed structure (124) is connected to a respective one of the plurality of parallel variation networks (706).
Regarding claim 8, Achour further discloses (Fig. 3) wherein each waveguide feed structure comprises a metallic base wall and a metallic top wall substantially parallel to the base wall ([0048]), and provided with a periodic pattern of apertures ([0048]), the waveguide feed structure defining a substantially linear cavity with first and second ends ([0048]).
Regarding claim 9, Achour further discloses (Fig. 3) wherein each waveguide feed structure further comprises first and second substantially parallel metallic side walls that are disposed substantially perpendicular to the base wall and the top wall ([0048]).
Regarding claim 12, Achour further discloses (Fig. 3) wherein the unit cells are configured to transmit RF signals through the apertures ([0048]).
Regarding claim 13, Achour further discloses (Fig. 5) wherein the reconfigurable components of the unit cells are in an upper electromagnetic metasurface layer disposed above the metallic top wall ([0053]).
Regarding claim 16, Achour further discloses wherein the reconfigurable components of the unit cells comprise at least one of switchable conductive patches, switchable slots, microelectromechanical (MEMS) elements, nanoelectromechanical (NEMS) elements, chiral change elements, or liquid crystal elements ([0027]).
Regarding claim 17, Achour further discloses (Fig. 8) wherein the reconfigurable components are configured to be switchable between at least a first state and a second state, the first state interacting with and modifying the RF signals differently to the second state ([0061]).
Regarding claim 18, Achour further discloses (Fig. 3-7) wherein the waveguide feed structures (124, 134) are arranged substantially parallel to each other so as to define a two dimensional array of unit cells arranged in rows and columns.
Regarding claim 19, Achour further discloses (Fig. 8) wherein the reconfigurable components of each unit cell are controllably addressable by row, or by column, or by both row and column ([0061]).
Claims 1, 8-9, 12-13, and 16-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Quarfoth (US PGPUB 2019/0245263 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Quarfoth discloses (Fig. 1) A reconfigurable antenna array (100) comprising: a radio frequency, RF, feed, configured to receive RF signals from an RF source (120); a plurality of waveguide feed structures (130), each waveguide feed structure comprising a plurality of unit cells arranged end-to-end (130), each unit cell configured to transmit RF signals out of the unit cell ([0050]); and an RF power distributor (125), operatively connected to said RF feed, configured to split the received RF signals into multiple channels and to allocate different channels to different respective waveguide feed structures (130), wherein each waveguide feed structure (130) is configured to guide the RF signals of the channel allocated to the waveguide structure to the unit cells of the waveguide feed structure (130); wherein each unit cell comprises reconfigurable components configured to manipulate electromagnetic properties of the RF signals received by the RF feed and guided along the respective waveguide structure so as to control a radiation pattern of the antenna array ([0044]).
Regarding claim 8, Quarfoth further discloses (Fig. 2A) wherein each waveguide feed structure comprises a metallic base wall (260) and a metallic top wall (260) substantially parallel to the base wall, and provided with a periodic pattern of apertures ([0055]), the waveguide feed structure defining a substantially linear cavity with first and second ends ([0055]-[0056]).
Regarding claim 9, Quarfoth further discloses (Fig. 2A) wherein each waveguide feed structure further comprises first and second substantially parallel metallic side walls that are disposed substantially perpendicular to the base wall and the top wall ([0055]).
Regarding claim 12, Quarfoth further discloses (Fig. 2A) wherein the unit cells are configured to transmit RF signals through the apertures (215).
Regarding claim 13, Quarfoth further discloses (Fig. 2A) wherein the reconfigurable components of the unit cells are in an upper electromagnetic metasurface layer disposed above the metallic top wall ([0043]).
Regarding claim 16, Quarfoth further discloses (Fig. 2A) wherein the reconfigurable components of the unit cells comprise at least one of switchable conductive patches, switchable slots, microelectromechanical (MEMS) elements, nanoelectromechanical (NEMS) elements, chiral change elements, or liquid crystal elements ([0069]-[0070]).
Regarding claim 17, Quarfoth further discloses (Fig. 2A) wherein the reconfigurable components are configured to be switchable between at least a first state and a second state, the first state interacting with and modifying the RF signals differently to the second state ([0069]-[0070]).
Regarding claim 18, Quarfoth further discloses (Fig. 1 and 2A) wherein the waveguide feed structures (130, 170) are arranged substantially parallel to each other so as to define a two dimensional array of unit cells arranged in rows and columns.
Regarding claim 19, Quarfoth further discloses (Fig. 1 and 2A) wherein the reconfigurable components of each unit cell are controllably addressable by row, or by column, or by both row and column ([0064]).
Regarding claim 20, Quarfoth further discloses (Fig. 1 and 2A) wherein adjacent waveguide feed structures (130, 170) are fed with RF signals in different frequency bands ([0047]).
Claims 1 and 8-11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Stevenson et al. (US PGPUB 2015/0222021 A1), hereinafter known as Stevenson.
Regarding claim 1, Stevenson discloses (Fig. 7A) A reconfigurable antenna array (799) comprising: a radio frequency, RF, feed, configured to receive RF signals from an RF source (205); a plurality of waveguide feed structures (743, 747), each waveguide feed structure comprising a plurality of unit cells arranged end-to-end (786, 789), each unit cell configured to transmit RF signals out of the unit cell ([0050]); and an RF power distributor (720A, 720B, 720C), operatively connected to said RF feed, configured to split the received RF signals into multiple channels and to allocate different channels to different respective waveguide feed structures (743, 747), wherein each waveguide feed structure (743, 747) is configured to guide the RF signals of the channel allocated to the waveguide structure to the unit cells of the waveguide feed structure (786, 789); wherein each unit cell comprises reconfigurable components (710A, 710D) configured to manipulate electromagnetic properties of the RF signals received by the RF feed and guided along the respective waveguide structure so as to control a radiation pattern of the antenna array ([0050]).
Regarding claim 8, Stevenson further discloses (Fig. 2C and 7A) wherein each waveguide feed structure (743, 747) comprises a metallic base wall (245) and a metallic top wall (236) substantially parallel to the base wall (245), and provided with a periodic pattern of apertures (212), the waveguide feed structure (743, 747) defining a substantially linear cavity with first and second ends.
Regarding claim 9, Stevenson further discloses (Fig. 2C and 7A) wherein each waveguide feed structure further comprises first and second substantially parallel metallic side walls (243) that are disposed substantially perpendicular to the base wall and the top wall.
Regarding claim 10, Stevenson further discloses (Fig. 2C and 7A) wherein the first and second substantially parallel metallic side walls (side walls of 743, 747) have a height, h, and a mutual separation distance, d, and wherein h > d (height of 743, 747 side walls is greater than the distance between sidewall of 743, 747), optionally h > 2d, optionally h > 3d, optionally h > 4d.
Regarding claim 11, Stevenson further discloses (Fig. 7A) wherein each waveguide feed structure (743, 747) is configured as a narrow wall waveguide feed structure ([0049]).
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 14-15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Achour in view of Smith et al. (US PGPUB 2018/0069318 A1), hereinafter known as Smith.
Regarding claim 14, Achour does not specifically teach wherein the reconfigurable components of the unit cells are in a lower electromagnetic metasurface layer disposed on or adjacent to the metallic base wall.
However, Smith teaches (Fig. 3) wherein the reconfigurable components of the unit cells (Fig. 3) are in a lower electromagnetic metasurface layer disposed on or adjacent to the metallic base wall (Fig. 3).
It would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to modify the reconfigurable antenna array of Achour with Smith to include “wherein the reconfigurable components of the unit cells are in a lower electromagnetic metasurface layer disposed on or adjacent to the metallic base wall,” as taught by Smith, for the purpose of achieving desired refractive properties (see also [0043]).
Regarding claim 14, Achour does not specifically teach wherein the reconfigurable components of the unit cells are in both an upper electromagnetic metasurface layer disposed above the metallic top wall and in a lower electromagnetic metasurface layer disposed on or adjacent to the metallic base wall.
However, Smith teaches (Fig. 3) wherein the reconfigurable components of the unit cells (Fig. 3) are in both an upper electromagnetic metasurface layer disposed above the metallic top wall (top wall of waveguide in Fig. 3) and in a lower electromagnetic metasurface layer disposed on or adjacent to the metallic base wall (bottom wall of waveguide in Fig. 3).
It would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to modify the reconfigurable antenna array of Achour with Smith to include “wherein the reconfigurable components of the unit cells are in both an upper electromagnetic metasurface layer disposed above the metallic top wall and in a lower electromagnetic metasurface layer disposed on or adjacent to the metallic base wall,” as taught by Smith, for the purpose of achieving desired refractive properties (see also [0043]).
Conclusion
The Examiner has pointed out particular references contained in the prior art of record within the body of this action for the convenience of the Applicant. Although the specified citations are representative of the teachings in the art and are applied to the specific limitations within the individual claim, other passages and figures may apply.
Applicant, in preparing the response, should consider fully the entire reference as potentially teaching all or part of the claimed invention, as well as the context of the passage as taught by the prior art or disclosed by the Examiner.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to YONCHAN J KIM whose telephone number is (571)272-3204. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 8:00 am - 5:00 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, Dameon Levi can be reached at (571) 272-2105. 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.
/DAMEON E LEVI/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2845
/YONCHAN J KIM/Examiner, Art Unit 2845
Prosecution Insights