DETAILED ACTION
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 .
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.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1-3, 7-9, and 13-15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Thai et al. (US11749889; hereinafter Thai).
Regarding independent claim 1, Thai (fig. 3A) discloses “A phased antenna array, comprising: a plurality of split element unit cells (18 and col. 7 lines 29-34; FIG. 8 schematically shows one example of the routing within the PCB from the ICs to the antenna elements. Here, the antenna elements are shown in a split feed configuration, in which two adjacent antenna apertures in a column (i.e., the patches) are connected to each other) arranged in an array having at least one row of split element unit cells, each row arranged relative to a horizontal row axis (see fig. 3A), wherein each split element unit cell comprises two split-fed antennas arranged substantially along a vertical column axis substantially normal to the row axis and having a phase center substantially along the column axis between the two split-fed antennas (fig. 3A), wherein the column axes of the split element unit cells of each row are substantially parallel, and wherein the phase center of each split element unit cell in a row is offset vertically from the phase center of an adjacent split element unit cell in the row by more than half of a single element unit cell up to and including a 1.5 element unit cells (see offset of 14 in fig. 3A)”.
Regarding claim 2, Thai (fig. 3A) discloses “The phased antenna array of claim 1, wherein the array is a one-dimensional array having one row of split element unit cells (fig. 3A shows at least a single row of split element unit cells that could operate as a one-dimensional array)”.
Regarding claim 3, Thai (fig. 3A) discloses “The phased antenna array of claim 1, wherein the array is a two-dimensional array having at least two rows of split element unit cells (fig. 3A)”.
Regarding independent claim 13, Thai (fig. 3A) discloses “A method of steering a beam with a phased array, the array comprising: a plurality of split element unit cells (18 and col. 7 lines 29-34; FIG. 8 schematically shows one example of the routing within the PCB from the ICs to the antenna elements. Here, the antenna elements are shown in a split feed configuration, in which two adjacent antenna apertures in a column (i.e., the patches) are connected to each other) arranged in an array having at least one row of split element unit cells, each row arranged relative to a horizontal row axis (see fig. 3A), wherein each split element unit cell comprises two split-fed antennas arranged substantially along a vertical column axis substantially normal to the row axis and having a phase center substantially along the column axis between the two split-fed antennas (fig. 3A), wherein the column axes of the split element unit cells of each row are substantially parallel, and wherein the phase center of each split element unit cell in a row is offset vertically from the phase center of an adjacent split element unit cell in the row by more than half of a single element unit cell up to and including a 1.5 element unit cells (see offset of 14 in fig. 3A), the method comprising, with an antenna controller: calculating beam steering vectors for the phased array; and with the beam steering vectors, controlling the plurality of split element unit cells (col. 3 lines 38-40; A separate antenna controller 24 (FIG. 2B) electrically connects with the phased array to calculate beam steering vectors for the overall phased array, and to provide other control functions)”.
Regarding claim 8, Thai (fig. 3A) discloses “The method of claim 7, wherein the array is a one-dimensional array having one row of split element unit cells (fig. 3A shows at least a single row of split element unit cells that could operate as a one-dimensional array)”.
Regarding claim 9, Thai (fig. 3A) discloses “The method of claim 7, wherein the array is a two-dimensional array having at least two rows of split element unit cells (fig. 3A)”.
Regarding independent claim 13, Thai (fig. 3A) discloses “A wireless device comprising: a phased antenna array, comprising: a plurality of split element unit cells (18 and col. 7 lines 29-34; FIG. 8 schematically shows one example of the routing within the PCB from the ICs to the antenna elements. Here, the antenna elements are shown in a split feed configuration, in which two adjacent antenna apertures in a column (i.e., the patches) are connected to each other) arranged in an array having at least one row of split element unit cells, each row arranged relative to a horizontal row axis (see fig. 3A), wherein each split element unit cell comprises two split-fed antennas arranged substantially along a vertical column axis substantially normal to the row axis and having a phase center substantially along the column axis between the two split-fed antennas (fig. 3A), wherein the column axes of the split element unit cells of each row are substantially parallel, and wherein the phase center of each split element unit cell in a row is offset vertically from the phase center of an adjacent split element unit cell in the row by more than half of a single element unit cell up to and including a 1.5 element unit cells (see offset of 14 in fig. 3A)”.
Regarding claim 14, Thai (fig. 3A) discloses “The wireless device of claim 13, wherein the array is a one-dimensional array having one row of split element unit cells (fig. 3A shows at least a single row of split element unit cells that could operate as a one-dimensional array)”.
Regarding claim 15, Thai (fig. 3A) discloses “The wireless device of claim 13, wherein the array is a two-dimensional array having at least two rows of split element unit cells (fig. 3A)”.
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 4-6, 10-12, and 16-18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Thai in view of Towfiq et al. (US20250038400; hereinafter Towfiq).
Regarding claim 4, Thai discloses the phased antenna array of claim 1 as shown previously.
Thai does not disclose “wherein a distance between the two antennas of a split element unit cell is configured to tailor the array to have an optimal directivity for a given scan volume, including a placement of nulls where grating lobes will appear during elevation scans”.
However, Towfiq teaches “wherein a distance between the two antennas of a split element unit cell is configured to tailor the array to have an optimal directivity for a given scan volume, including a placement of nulls where grating lobes will appear during elevation scans (¶[0065]; Based on the adjustability of the reconfigurable emitters 404, radiation emitted by the antenna system 400 can exhibit high gain across a wide range of steering angles (equivalently, low scan loss) and high directivity. In general, the emission characteristics of a phased antenna array (PAA) can be formulated as Array Pattern (AP)=Element Factor (EF)×Array Factor (AF), where EF describes the properties of individual antenna elements (e.g., radiation pattern, polarization, and frequency) and AF describes the pattern of the array in the case where each antenna element is replaced by an isotropic antenna coupled to a common current source. In traditional array design, EF is fixed, and AF (and thus AP) is controlled only by adjusting beamforming weights (e.g., phase and/or amplitude) of currents provided to each antenna element. This may result in high scan loss as emitted beams are steered away from broadside. Moreover, signal processing algorithms may be limited to optimizing only the element-wise weights, which may limit system flexibility. However, when the antenna elements are reconfigurable as described herein for the reconfigurable emitters 404, AP is jointly controlled by both EF and AF. This joint optimization can, in some implementations, reduce scan loss associated with PAAs, resulting in improved gain (e.g., 3-5 dB more gain in some implementations) compared to a traditional PAA over the full beam-steering range. In addition, an additional degree of freedom is provided by the reconfigurable emitters 404, introducing new opportunities for system optimization and beamforming based on jointly-optimized software and/or hardware. This can result in, for example, improved directivity, such as lower power transmitted to beam nulls, and/or overall improved emission flexibility, e.g., complex wave-shapes to provided targeted beam transmission to multiple receiving devices)”.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to apply the teachings of Towfiq and make Thai’s phased antenna array wherein a distance between the two antennas of a split element unit cell is configured to tailor the array to have an optimal directivity for a given scan volume, including a placement of nulls where grating lobes will appear during elevation scans, in order to improve transmission of the antenna array.
Regarding claim 5, the modified Thai discloses the phased antenna array of claim 4 as shown previously.
Thai does not disclose “wherein the distance between the two antennas of a split element unit cell is decreased relative to a nominal distance”.
However, Towfiq teaches “wherein the distance between the two antennas of a split element unit cell is decreased relative to a nominal distance (¶[0064]; The array 402 can include various numbers of reconfigurable emitters 404, in various patterns. For example, the array can include several, tens, hundreds, or thousands of reconfigurable emitters 404, and the reconfigurable emitters 404 can be arranged in a regular array (e.g., with regular rows/columns) and/or in a spatially-varying array, e.g., with spatially-varying separation between reconfigurable emitters 404)”.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to apply the teachings of Towfiq and make Thai’s phased antenna array wherein the distance between the two antennas of a split element unit cell is decreased relative to a nominal distance, in order to improve transmission of the antenna array by changing directivity.
Regarding claim 6, the modified Thai discloses the phased antenna array of claim 4 as shown previously.
Thai does not disclose “wherein the distance between the two antennas of a split element unit cell is increased relative to a nominal distance”.
However, Towfiq teaches “wherein the distance between the two antennas of a split element unit cell is increased relative to a nominal distance (¶[0064]; The array 402 can include various numbers of reconfigurable emitters 404, in various patterns. For example, the array can include several, tens, hundreds, or thousands of reconfigurable emitters 404, and the reconfigurable emitters 404 can be arranged in a regular array (e.g., with regular rows/columns) and/or in a spatially-varying array, e.g., with spatially-varying separation between reconfigurable emitters 404)”.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to apply the teachings of Towfiq and make Thai’s phased antenna array wherein the distance between the two antennas of a split element unit cell is increased relative to a nominal distance, in order to improve transmission of the antenna array by changing directivity.
Regarding claim 10, Thai discloses The method of claim 7 as shown previously.
Thai does not disclose “wherein a distance between the two antennas of a split element unit cell is configured to tailor the array to have an optimal directivity for a given scan volume, including a placement of nulls where grating lobes will appear during elevation scans”.
However, Towfiq teaches “wherein a distance between the two antennas of a split element unit cell is configured to tailor the array to have an optimal directivity for a given scan volume, including a placement of nulls where grating lobes will appear during elevation scans (¶[0065])”.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to apply the teachings of Towfiq and make Thai’s method wherein a distance between the two antennas of a split element unit cell is configured to tailor the array to have an optimal directivity for a given scan volume, including a placement of nulls where grating lobes will appear during elevation scans, in order to improve transmission of the antenna array.
Regarding claim 11, the modified Thai discloses the method of claim 10 as shown previously.
Thai does not disclose “wherein the distance between the two antennas of a split element unit cell is decreased relative to a nominal distance”.
However, Towfiq teaches “wherein the distance between the two antennas of a split element unit cell is decreased relative to a nominal distance (¶[0064]; The array 402 can include various numbers of reconfigurable emitters 404, in various patterns. For example, the array can include several, tens, hundreds, or thousands of reconfigurable emitters 404, and the reconfigurable emitters 404 can be arranged in a regular array (e.g., with regular rows/columns) and/or in a spatially-varying array, e.g., with spatially-varying separation between reconfigurable emitters 404)”.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to apply the teachings of Towfiq and make Thai’s phased method wherein the distance between the two antennas of a split element unit cell is decreased relative to a nominal distance, in order to improve transmission of the antenna array by changing directivity.
Regarding claim 12, the modified Thai discloses the method of claim 10 as shown previously.
Thai does not disclose “wherein the distance between the two antennas of a split element unit cell is increased relative to a nominal distance”.
However, Towfiq teaches “wherein the distance between the two antennas of a split element unit cell is increased relative to a nominal distance (¶[0064]; The array 402 can include various numbers of reconfigurable emitters 404, in various patterns. For example, the array can include several, tens, hundreds, or thousands of reconfigurable emitters 404, and the reconfigurable emitters 404 can be arranged in a regular array (e.g., with regular rows/columns) and/or in a spatially-varying array, e.g., with spatially-varying separation between reconfigurable emitters 404)”.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to apply the teachings of Towfiq and make Thai’s method wherein the distance between the two antennas of a split element unit cell is increased relative to a nominal distance, in order to improve transmission of the antenna array by changing directivity.
Regarding claim 16, Thai discloses the wireless device of claim 13 as shown previously.
Thai does not disclose “wherein a distance between the two antennas of a split element unit cell is configured to tailor the array to have an optimal directivity for a given scan volume, including a placement of nulls where grating lobes will appear during elevation scans”.
However, Towfiq teaches “wherein a distance between the two antennas of a split element unit cell is configured to tailor the array to have an optimal directivity for a given scan volume, including a placement of nulls where grating lobes will appear during elevation scans (¶[0065])”.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to apply the teachings of Towfiq and make Thai’s wireless device wherein a distance between the two antennas of a split element unit cell is configured to tailor the array to have an optimal directivity for a given scan volume, including a placement of nulls where grating lobes will appear during elevation scans, in order to improve transmission of the antenna array.
Regarding claim 17, the modified Thai discloses the wireless device of claim 16 as shown previously.
Thai does not disclose “wherein the distance between the two antennas of a split element unit cell is decreased relative to a nominal distance”.
However, Towfiq teaches “wherein the distance between the two antennas of a split element unit cell is decreased relative to a nominal distance (¶[0064]; The array 402 can include various numbers of reconfigurable emitters 404, in various patterns. For example, the array can include several, tens, hundreds, or thousands of reconfigurable emitters 404, and the reconfigurable emitters 404 can be arranged in a regular array (e.g., with regular rows/columns) and/or in a spatially-varying array, e.g., with spatially-varying separation between reconfigurable emitters 404)”.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to apply the teachings of Towfiq and make Thai’s wireless device wherein the distance between the two antennas of a split element unit cell is decreased relative to a nominal distance, in order to improve transmission of the antenna array by changing directivity.
Regarding claim 18, the modified Thai discloses the wireless device of claim 16 as shown previously.
Thai does not disclose “wherein the distance between the two antennas of a split element unit cell is increased relative to a nominal distance”.
However, Towfiq teaches “wherein the distance between the two antennas of a split element unit cell is increased relative to a nominal distance (¶[0064]; The array 402 can include various numbers of reconfigurable emitters 404, in various patterns. For example, the array can include several, tens, hundreds, or thousands of reconfigurable emitters 404, and the reconfigurable emitters 404 can be arranged in a regular array (e.g., with regular rows/columns) and/or in a spatially-varying array, e.g., with spatially-varying separation between reconfigurable emitters 404)”.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to apply the teachings of Towfiq and make Thai’s wireless device wherein the distance between the two antennas of a split element unit cell is increased relative to a nominal distance, in order to improve transmission of the antenna array by changing directivity.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to AUSTIN MICHAEL BACK whose telephone number is (703)756-4521. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 8 AM - 5 PM 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 http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Dimary Lopez can be reached on (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.
/AUSTIN M BACK/Examiner, Art Unit 2845
/ALEXANDER H TANINGCO/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2845
Prosecution Insights