The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
The disclosure is objected to because of the following informalities: Page 1, line 15, note that the recitation of “it is called a 3dB hybrid or hybrid coupler” should be rewritten as --it is called a “3dB hybrid” or “hybrid coupler”-- for an appropriate characterization. At all appropriate instances throughout the specification where pronouns are used (e.g. they, it, them, its, their, etc.), such pronouns should be respectively rewritten to indicate the corresponding intended feature or element for clarity and completeness of description. Page 2, lines 21-23, note that the recitation of “third 106 and fourth 110 directional couplers” should be rewritten as --third and fourth directional couples 106, 110-- for an appropriate characterization. In general, where like descriptions appear throughout the specification, such descriptions should also be rewritten in the same manner as set forth above for clarity and completeness of description. Page 2, line 24, note that the recitation of “a so called symmetric Butler matrix” should be rewritten as --a so called “symmetric Butler matrix”-- for an appropriate characterization. Page 2, line 27 and page 4, line 23, note that --of the Invention-- should be inserted after “Summary” (i.e. page 2) and inserted after “Detail Description” (i.e. page 4), respectively for consistency with PTO guidelines. Page 4, lines 3-5 and page 11, lines 26, 35, note that the drawing numbering for Figures (9, 10, 11, 12, 13) do not appear consistent with the numbering associated with those drawings and thus appropriate clarification is needed. Page 4, line 25, note that --description-- should be inserted prior to “sets” for an appropriate characterization. Page 5, line 28, note that --in Figure 2-- should be inserted after “A-A” for an appropriate characterization; lines 29 & 30, note that the recitation of “referred to in some examples as first and second patches” should be rewritten as --referred in some examples as “first and second patches”-- for an appropriate characterization. Page 10, line 7, note that the recitation of “is referred to as tight coupling” should be rewritten as --is referred to as “tight coupling”-- for an appropriate characterization. Page 11, lines 4, 5, note that labels (304, 310) do not appear in any of FIGS. 5, 6 & 7, described herein and thus these reference labels should be reference with respect to those drawings in which they appear in for clarity and completeness of description. In general, where reference labels throughout the detail description are not consistent with the individual drawing being described, those inconsistent reference labels should reference the appropriate drawings in which they appear for clarity and completeness of description. Page 11, line 21, note that the recitation of “1 to 4” should be rewritten as --1, 2, 3 and 4-- for an appropriate characterization; line 22, note that the recitation of “804, 804, 806 and 806” should be rewritten as --802, 804, 806 and 808-- for an appropriate characterization consistent with the labeling in Figure 8. Appropriate correction is required.
The disclosure is objected to because of the following informalities: Note that the following reference labels and descriptive wording appearing in the indicated drawings need to be correspondingly described in the specification description of the indicated drawing for clarity and completeness of description: FIG. 2 (Complete Array, Dual-polarized elements, BFN layers for dual polarization); FIG. 3 (h1, h2, Ihc); FIG. 4 (302, 306, w1, Patch, Slot, Common ground plane); FIGS. 5, 6, 7, 9(a), 9(b), 10(a), 10(b), 11(a), 11(b), 12(a), 12(b), 13(a), 13(b), 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, a detail explanation of the corresponding axes, parameters and curves in the respective graphs is needed; FIG. 8 (810, 812, l1, lref, w1, w2, wref, Coupler, Port (5, 6, 7, 8), Phase shifter); FIG. 14, “1414”; FIGS. 15, 16, “Middle plate”; FIG. 17 (1610, 1618). Appropriate correction is required.
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 2, 11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor, or for pre-AIA the applicant regards as the invention.
In claim 2, lines 3 & 4, note that it is unclear whether the recitation of “are not electrically connected together” would be an accurate characterization of this aspect of the invention, especially since it is known in the art that there is always an “electrical” connection present between conductive elements, even if these elements do not directly contact each other. Appropriate clarification is needed.
In claim 11, line 2, note that “the first hole” lacks strict antecedent basis, especially since claim 1 recites “at least one hole”. Appropriate clarification is needed.
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, 11-17, 24, 25, 28 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being clearly anticipated by Fujiki.
Fujiki (i.e. FIG. 2) discloses a directional coupler (i.e. 1), comprising: a first electrically conductive portion (i.e. stripline electrodes (5f, 5g) in FIG. 2) and a second electrically conductive portion (i.e. stripline electrodes (3f, 3g) in FIG. 2); a first ground plane electrical conductor (i.e. ground electrode 4b) disposed in a plane between the first electrically conductive portion (5f, 5g) and the second electrically conductive portion (3f, 3g), as evident from FIG. 2; a second ground plane electrical conductor (i.e. ground electrode 6b) and a third ground plane electrical conductor (i.e. ground electrode 2b), such that the first and second electrically conductive portions (5f, 5g; 3f, 3g), as well as the first ground plane electrical conductor (4b) are disposed between the second ground plane electrical conductor (6b) and the third ground plane electrical conductor (2b), as evident from FIG. 2; a hole (i.e. unlabeled, but evidently present in the first ground electrical conductor (4b) in FIG. 2) is disposed between the first and second ground electrical conductors (5f, 5g; 3f, 3g), as evident from FIG. 2. Regarding claim 11, as evident from FIG. 2, the hole, being elongated in shape, is clearly larger in size than a size of either the first electrically conductive portion (5f, 5g) or the second electrically conductive portion (3f, 3g). Regarding claim 12, as evident from FIG. 12, the first and second electrically conductive portions (5f, 5g; 3f, 3g), as well as the first ground electrical conductor (4b) are all aligned in parallel with respect to each other. Regarding claim 13, as evident from FIG. 2, the second ground plane electrical conductor (6b) is disposed above the first electrically conductive portion (5f, 5g), while the third ground plane electrical conductor (2b) is disposed below the second electrically conductive portion (3f, 3g). Regarding claim 14, as evident from FIG. 2, a ceramic layer (6) constitutes a substrate between the first electrically conductive portion (5f, 5g) and the second ground plane electrical conductor (6b) and a ceramic layer (3) constitutes a substrate between the second electrically conductive portion (3f, 3g) and the third ground plane electrical conductor (2b). Regarding claim 15, as evident in FIG. 2, the first ground plane electrical conductor (4b) is embedded or sandwiched between ceramic substrate layers (i.e. 4, 5). Regarding claim 16, as evident from FIG. 2, the first electrically conductive portion (5f, 5g) is disposed on a first (i.e. top surface) of the ceramic substrate layer (5), while the second electrically conductive portion (3f, 3g) is disposed on a surface of a ceramic layer (3) that is opposite the surface of the ceramic layer (5). Regarding claim 17, as evident from FIG. 2, the second ground plane electrical conductor (6b), the first electrically conductive portion (5f, 5g). the first ground plane electrical conductor (4b), the second electrically conductive portion (3f, 3g) and the third ground plane electrical conductor (2b) are sequentially stacked on respective ceramic layers that form the directional coupler (1). Regarding claim 24, as evident from FIG. 2, at least a portion of the first and second electrically conductive portions (5f, 5g; 3f, 3g) protrude through the hole (i.e. in the form of through vias holes (4h, 4i) that electrically connect with the first and second electrically conductive portions). Regarding claim 25, as evident from FIG. 2, since the first and second electrically conductive portions are formed as striplines, such striplines are known by one of ordinary skill in the art to operate in a TEM mode. Regarding claim 28, as is evident from related FIG. 6, the directional coupler (1) is capable of use in an electronic device, such as a portable telephone.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102 of this title, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claim 29 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Fujiki in view of Carson.
Fujiki, as described in the preceding rejection, discloses the claimed invention, except for being used in a beamforming network, such as a Butler matrix.
Carson (i.e. FIG. 7A) exemplarily discloses a Butler matrix beam forming network. As is evident from FIG. 7A, a plurality of directional couplers has been used to form the Butler matrix.
Accordingly, it would have been obvious in view of the references, taken as a whole, to have modified the generic directional couplers in the Butler matrix of Carson to have been directional couplers of the type taught by Fujiki. Such a modification would have been considered an obvious substitution of art recognized equivalent directional couplers, especially since the generic nature of the directional couplers in FIG. 7A of Carson would have suggested that any equivalent directional coupler, such as the directional coupler in Fujiki, would have been usable therein, thereby suggesting the obviousness of such a modification.
Claims 18-23 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Any inquiry concerning this communication should be directed to Benny Lee at telephone number 571 272 1764.
/BENNY T LEE/PRIMARY EXAMINER
ART UNIT 2843
B. Lee
Prosecution Insights