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 .
Preliminary Amendment
The amendment filed 5/21/2025 pursuant to 37 CFR 1.115. Claims 1-22 are pending.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted 5/21/2025 is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97 and being considered by the examiner.
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 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 1-8, 10-11, 14-22 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by J.L.Cano et al., Full Band Waveguide Turnstile Junction Orthomode Transducer with Phase Matched Outputs, Int’l J. of RF and Microwave Computer-Aided Eng., Vol. 20, No. 3, May 2010, pp. 333-341 (“Cano”).
Cano discloses in Figs. 1-13 and the corresponding description:
Claims 1, 18-22
A tuning element module (Figs. 2, 8, scatterer) for a modular waveguide junction (Fig. 1, orthomode transducer; Fig. 2, turnstile junction; pp. 334-35) for combining and/or separating first and second signals of differing polarizations (Fig. 1, TE10a and TW10b), wherein the tuning element module is configured to removably attach to said modular waveguide junction (p. 334, “the bandwidth can be shifted or modified by simply changing the scatterer”).
Regarding claims 21-22, Cano discloses that the proposed turnstile junction orthomode transducer is used in the radio-astronomy HEMT-based receivers covering the bands 10-14 GHz, 14-22 GHz and 26-36 GHz, configured to receive a combination of the first and second signals and would include at least one duplexer (p. 333).
Claim 2
wherein the modular waveguide junction comprises one or more selected from the group of:
a turnstile junction (Fig. 2);
an orthomode junction (Fig. 1); and
a junction of an orthomode transducer (Fig. 1).
Claim 3
wherein the tuning element module comprises a turnstile for use in a turnstile junction (Figs. 2, 8).
Claim 4
wherein the tuning element module comprises means for adjusting one or more of (Fig. 2 and Table 1 disclosing various parameters for the scatterer for adjusting the operational bandwidth):
a radio frequency performance of said modular waveguide junction;
an operational bandwidth of said modular waveguide junction;
an operational frequency of said modular waveguide junction;
a return loss characteristic of said modular waveguide junction.
Claim 5
wherein the tuning element module comprises an elongate member extending from a base member (Figs. 2, 8; members with diameter D1, D2, D3, D4).
Claim 6
wherein the elongate member comprises one or more of:
at least one tuning stub (Figs. 2, 8; members with diameter D1, D2, D3, D4); and
at least one metallic pin (Fig. 8, M4 thread).
Claim 7
wherein a cross-sectional shape of the elongate member varies along its length (Fig. 2, cross-sectional shape of the scatterer varies from D1 to D4).
Claim 8
wherein the elongate member comprises one or more of:
at least one cylindrical portion (Figs. 2, 8; cylindrical members with diameter D1, D2, D3, D4), and
at least one rectangular portion.
Claim 10
wherein the elongate member comprises a cylindrical portion with a plurality of protruding rounded edges projecting therefrom (Figs. 2, 8; cylindrical members with diameter D1, D2, D3, D4).
Claim 11
wherein a cross-sectional dimension of the elongate member varies along its length (Fig. 2, cross-sectional shape of the scatterer varies from D1 to D4).
Claim 14
further comprising means for facilitating insertion into said modular waveguide junction (Fig. 8, base chamfer and/or M4 thread).
Claim 15
wherein the base member comprises a chamfered edge or a beveled edge (Fig. 8, base chamfer).
Claim 16
further comprising means for locating and/or aligning the tuning element module in said modular waveguide junction (Fig. 8, M4 thread).
Claim 17
wherein the base member comprises at least one projecting boss member (Fig. 8, the M4 thread includes a boss member at the bottom of the thread).
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.
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 12-13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Cano in view of G.L. Matthaei et al., Microwave Filter, Impedance-matching Networks, and Coupling Structures, Artech House Books, 1980, pp. 921-932 (“Matthaei”).
Regarding Claims 12-13, Cano discuses all the limitations except “means for providing a radio frequency wave trap” [claim 12] and “one notch around a perimeter of the base member” [claim 13].
However, Matthaei, in the same filed of endeavor, discloses means for providing a radio frequency wave trap, such as radial line chokes (grooves) on tuning plungers (Figs. 15.04-2, 15.04-8, p. 932).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the scatterer of Cano by adding radial line chokes for the benefit of reducing unwanted modes and frequency leaking, as taught by Matthaei (p. 932).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 9 is 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.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
A. Navarrini and R. L. Plambeck, A Turnstile Junction Waveguide Orthomode Transducer, IEEE Transactions on Microwave Theory and Techniques, Vol. 54, No. 1, pp. 272-277, Jan. 2006 (“Navarrini”) discloses a turnstile junction waveguide orthomode transducer including a metallic tuning stub in the shape of a square prism, which is non-removably installed in the waveguide (p. 273).
C. G. Montgomery, R. H. Dicke, and E. M. Purcell, Principles of Microwave Circuits, McGraw-Hill, New York, 1948, pp.197-198, discloses radio frequency wave traps, such as circular choke grooves, to reduce radio frequency leakage.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to VICTOR COLE, telephone number (571) 272-4686. The examiner can be reached Monday-Friday, 9AM-5PM ET.
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 www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, ANDREA LINDGREN BALTZELL, can be reached at (571) 272-5918. 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 www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/patent-center for more information about Patent Center and 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.
/VICTOR COLE/
Examiner, Art Unit 2843
/ANDREA LINDGREN BALTZELL/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2843
Prosecution Insights