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 Objections
Claims 9 and 12-13 are objected to because of the following informalities:
Claims 9, Line 5; Claim 12, Line 4; and Claim 13, Line 4, "the wavelength of the electromagnetic wave" should be rewritten as -- a wavelength of the electromagnetic wave –.
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 3-11, 13, and 18-20 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. Claims 4-8, 10, and 19-20 depend upon rejected claims 3, 9 and 18 and inherit the deficiency thereby.
Claim 3, Line 4; Claim 9, Line 2; Claim 11, Line 2; Claim 13, Line 2; and Claim 18, Line 4 recite the limitation "the third direction". There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Appropriate correction is required.
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 and 16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Goebel (US 20220209423).
As per Claims 1 and 16:
Goebel discloses in Figure 1A:
(as per claim 16) A radar (“radar apparatus”, 300, as shown in related Figure 8), comprising (as per claims 1 and 16) a waveguide apparatus (“apparatus”, 100) with N radiation ports wherein N is an integer greater than or equal to 1 (there is 4 “boundary slots”, 202.1, 202.2, 203.1, 203.2, are serving as radiating slots, [0148]), a resonant cavity (“cavities”, 111.1 and 111.2, a cavity is known to be resonant at a specified frequency, as is known to one of ordinary skill in the art) radiating a signal over the N radiation ports in a first direction (the signal is radiated in the z-direction, [0090]), a coupling cavity (“central opening”, 116, as shown in related Figure 1B) coupling the signal to the resonant cavity (111.1, 111.2, as is evident by related figure 1B) and located between the resonant cavity (111.1, 111.2) and a feed-in structure (“waveguide”, 150, as is evident by the positioning and features as shown in related Figure 1C), wherein the feed-in structure feeds a signal (waveguide 150, [0089] being a central waveguide feed for feeding the planar radiator groups, [0041], thereby feeding a signal), and the coupling cavity (116) is connected to the resonant cavity (111.1, 111.2) in a second direction (111.1-111.2 are connected to 116 in the x direction by being an opening in a horizontal plane between 111.1 and 111.2 in the x-direction, as is evident by Figure 1B), which is perpendicular to the first direction (the x-axis is perpendicular to the z-axis).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 2, 14-15, and 17 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.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ABIGAIL YALDO whose telephone number is (703)756-1784. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 7 AM - 4 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, 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 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.
/ABIGAIL AMIR YALDO/Examiner, Art Unit 2843
/ANDREA LINDGREN BALTZELL/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2843
Prosecution Insights