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 .
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 10/8/2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. Specifically, regarding Applicant’s argument about Eder et al. not teaching or suggesting that the feedline of the antenna extends through any of its apertures in Fig. 5, the relied upon Fig. 3 of Eder et al. in the rejection clearly shows apertures 228a and 228b in the perimeter wall and teaches “In an embodiment with a sandwiched antenna array or with an antenna array on the exterior side of the housing, the carrier (or one its layers, as appropriate) may include one or more apertures so that the conductive members may extend through the aperture(s) to make electrical contact with the antenna” in Par. 0010. Thus the rejection is maintained. Applicant's representative is invited to telephone the examiner for any clarification of any matter in this case.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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 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.
Claims 1-6 & 9-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wang et al. US Patent Application Publication 2019/0109622 and Eder et al. US Patent Application Publication 2012/0235879.
Regarding Claim 1, Wang et al. teaches a housing (158 Fig. 2 Par. 0053) for a mobile computing device (10 Figs. 1, 2 Par. 0052, 0053), the housing comprising:
a first frame (140 Figs. 1, 2 Par. 0058) including a perimeter wall (144 Figs. 1, 2 Par. 0059) encircling a housing interior (internal space of the housing Figs. 1, 2 Par. 0059), the perimeter wall (140 Fig. 2 Par. 0059) having a carrier surface (146 / vertical portions of 140 Figs. 1, 2 Par. 0059) facing outwards from the housing interior (Figs. 1, 2), the carrier surface defining an outer surface of the perimeter wall (146 defining outer surface of perimeter wall 140 as seen in Figs. 1, 2);
an antenna (300 Figs. 1, 2 Par. 0058) having a radiating element (vertical portion of 300 better seen in Fig. 1 / 306-309 better seen in Fig. 2 Par. 0101) affixed to the carrier surface of the first frame and separated from the housing interior by the perimeter wall (better seen in Fig. 1 vertical portions of 300 affixed to 146 and separated from the housing interior by the perimeter wall 144), the antenna having a feedline (feeding line 116 Fig. 3 Par. 0104); and
a second frame (160 Fig. 2 Par. 0058, 0059) having (i) an inner surface facing towards the housing interior (inner / bottom surface of 160 as seen in Fig. 2), and (ii) an outer surface defining an exterior surface of the mobile computing device (outer surface of 160 Fig. 2), the second frame affixed to the first frame over a length around the housing interior (Fig. 2) and encasing at least a portion of the radiating element between the carrier surface and the inner surface of the second frame (as seen in Fig. 2 upon assembly that 160 would encase the radiating element of antenna 300 between 146 and inner surface of 160).
Wang et al. is silent on the feedline extending through the aperture in the perimeter wall of the first frame.
However, Eder et al. teaches apertures in the first frame for feeding the antenna (127 a, 127 b, 127 c Fig. 2 Par. 0036, 228 a, 228 b Fig. 3 Par. 0038); and teaches “In an embodiment with a sandwiched antenna array or with an antenna array on the exterior side of the housing, the carrier (or one its layers, as appropriate) may include one or more apertures so that the conductive members may extend through the aperture(s) to make electrical contact with the antenna” (Par. 0010).
In this particular case, providing the antenna feedline to extend through an aperture in the perimeter wall of the first frame is common and well known in the art as evident by Eder et al. in order to provide access to the desired feeding location in a simplified design (Par. 0038).
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to extend the feedline of the antenna of Wang et al. through an aperture in the perimeter wall of the first frame based on the teachings of Eder et al. as a result effect in order to provide access to the desired feeding location in a simplified design.
Regarding Claim 2, Wang et al. as modified teaches wherein the second frame is affixed to the first frame (“the support member 140 and housing 160 are integrated together into a unitary housing 158” Par. 0068).
Wang et al. is silent on wherein the second frame is affixed to the first frame by overmolding.
However, Eder et al. teaches the use of overmolding to form 3D antenna structures with housings (Par. 0027, 0040, 0041).
In this particular case, affixing the second frame to the first frame by overmolding is common and well known in the antenna art as evident by Eder et al. to provide a strong 3D structure with a desired aesthetic appearance (Par. 0027, 0040, 0041).
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to affix the second frame of Wang et al. to the first frame by overmolding based on the teachings of Eder et al. as a result effect in order to provide a strong 3D structure with an appealing aesthetic appearance.
Regarding Claim 3, Wang et al. as modified teaches wherein the second frame is affixed to a rear portion of the perimeter wall (As seen from Fig. 2 160 would be affixed to a rear/back portion 142 of 144 Par. 0059).
Regarding Claim 4, Wang et al. as modified teaches further comprising a cover (170 Figs. 1, 2 Par. 0059) affixed to the perimeter wall (better seen in Fig. 1) to enclose the first frame within the second frame and the cover (as can be seen in Figs. 1 & 2 when the device is assembled, the first frame 140 would be enclosed within the frame/bezel (not labeled) around 170 and second frame 160).
Regarding Claim 5, Wang et al. as modified teaches wherein the first frame is configured to support an internal component of the mobile computing device within the housing interior (“The inner surfaces 144 of the top portion 140 a, bottom portion 140 b, and two side portions 140 c and 140 d collectively form a rectangular perimeter that defines a central region for receiving hardware components, such as a battery 154 and some of the electronic components populated on the PCB 150” Figs. 1, 2 Par. 0059).
Wang et al. is silent on wherein the first frame includes an anchor configured to support an internal component of the mobile computing device within the housing interior.
However, Eder et al. teaches the use of anchors (bosses 429 Fig. 5 Par. 0040).
In this particular case, providing an anchor/bosses is common and well known in the art as evident by Eder et al. to use a fastener to secure components within a housing.
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to provide the first frame of Wang et al. with an anchor based on the teachings of Eder et al. as a result effect in order to use a fastener to secure components within the housing.
Regarding Claim 6, Wang et al. as modified teaches wherein the antenna is affixed to the carrier surface (“The back, inner, and outer surfaces 142, 144, 146 of the support member 140 provide support to the antenna array” Par. 0059). Additionally, Wang et al. teaches “The antenna array may also be secured to the support member 140 using other suitable mechanisms, such as a laser direct structuring (LDS) process” Par. 0068.
Wang et al. is silent on wherein the antenna is affixed to the carrier surface by metallization of an activated region of the carrier surface.
However, Eder et al. teaches wherein the antenna is affixed to the carrier surface (“With LDS technology, an antenna pattern is shaped with a laser on a plastic surface, and the energy provided by the laser allows the excited area to be subsequently plated with metal” Par. 0008).
In this particular case, using Laser Direct Structure (LDS) process for forming antennas on a carrier is common and well known in the art as a process of metallization of an activated region by laser of the carrier surface as evident by Eder et al. Par. 0007-0008.
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to affix the antenna of Wang et al. to the carrier surface by metallization of an activated region of the carrier surface which is known as Laser Direct Structure (LDS) based on the teachings of Wang et al. and Eder et al. as a result effect in order to provide a flexible method of forming the antenna on the carrier surface.
Regarding Claim 9, Wang et al. as modified teaches wherein the housing comprises a plurality of antennas, having respective radiating elements (200, 300, 400, 500, and 600(1-4) Figs. 1-3 Par. 0058) affixed to respective spaced-apart regions of the carrier surface (Figs. 1-3).
Regarding Claim 10, Wang et al. as modified teaches wherein a first subset of the plurality of antennas implement a first communication standard (“Antennas 200 and 300 are configured to operate in the same frequency ranges, for example, in 700 MHz-960 MHz, 1700 MHz-2100 MHz, and 3 GHz-5 GHz” Par. 0056); and wherein a second subset of the plurality of antennas implement a second communication standard (“Antennas 400, 500, and 600 are configured to operate in the same frequency range, for example, from 3 GHz-5 GHz” Par. 0056).
Regarding Claim 11, Wang et al. teaches providing a first frame (140 Figs. 1, 2 Par. 0058) including a perimeter wall (144 Figs. 1, 2 Par. 0059) to encircle a housing interior (internal space of the housing 158 Figs. 1, 2 Par. 0059) of a mobile computing device (10 Figs. 1, 2 Par. 0052, 0053), the perimeter wall (140 Fig. 2 Par. 0059) having a carrier surface (146 / vertical portions of 140 Figs. 1, 2 Par. 0059) facing outwards from the housing interior (146 facing outwards from housing interior Figs. 1, 2), the carrier surface defining an outer surface of the perimeter wall (146 defining outer surface of perimeter wall 140 as seen in Figs. 1, 2);
affixing a radiating element (vertical portion of 300 better seen in Fig. 1 / 306-309 better seen in Fig. 2 Par. 0101) of an antenna (300 Figs. 1, 2 Par. 0058) to the carrier surface of the first frame, the radiating element separated from the housing interior by the perimeter wall (better seen in Fig. 1 vertical portions of 300 affixed to 146 and separated from the housing interior by the perimeter wall 144), the antenna having a feedline (feeding line 116 Fig. 3 Par. 0104); and
affixing a second frame (160 Fig. 2 Par. 0058, 0059), having an inner surface facing towards the housing interior (inner / bottom surface of 160 as seen in Fig. 2), along a length of the first frame (Fig. 2) and encasing at least a portion of the radiating element between the carrier surface and the inner surface of the second frame (as seen in Fig. 2 upon assembly that 160 would encase the radiating element of antenna 300 between 146 and inner surface of 160), the second frame further including an outer surface defining an exterior surface of the mobile computing device (outer surface of 160 Fig. 2).
Wang et al. is silent on a method; the feedline extending through the aperture in the perimeter wall of the first frame.
However, Eder et al. teaches apertures in the first frame for feeding the antenna (127 a, 127 b, 127 c Fig. 2 Par. 0036, 228 a, 228 b Fig. 3 Par. 0038); and teaches “In an embodiment with a sandwiched antenna array or with an antenna array on the exterior side of the housing, the carrier (or one its layers, as appropriate) may include one or more apertures so that the conductive members may extend through the aperture(s) to make electrical contact with the antenna” (Par. 0010). Additionally, claim 11 merely recites a method step of forming the device which is immaterial to the patentability of the device itself.
In this particular case, providing the antenna feedline to extend through an aperture in the perimeter wall of the first frame is common and well known in the art as evident by Eder et al. in order to provide access to the desired feeding location in a simplified design (Par. 0038).Additionally, the method steps disclosed therein are deemed as being obvious in the assembly and operation of the prior art applied since Wang et al. is construed as teaching or suggesting all of the elements as recited in the method. Thus the claim is deemed unpatentable.
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to extend the feedline of the antenna of Wang et al. through an aperture in the perimeter wall of the first frame based on the teachings of Eder et al. as a result effect in order to provide access to the desired feeding location in a simplified design; and to provide and affix the elements of Wang et al. to form the device.
Regarding Claim 12, Wang et al. as modified teaches affixing the second frame onto the first frame (“the support member 140 and housing 160 are integrated together into a unitary housing 158” Par. 0068).
Wang et al. is silent on wherein affixing the second frame includes overmolding the second frame onto the first frame.
However, Eder et al. teaches the use of overmolding to form 3D antenna structures with housings (Par. 0027, 0040, 0041).
In this particular case, affixing the second frame to the first frame by overmolding is common and well known in the antenna art as evident by Eder et al. to provide a strong 3D structure with a desired aesthetic appearance (Par. 0027, 0040, 0041).
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to affix the second frame of Wang et al. onto the first frame by overmolding based on the teachings of Eder et al. as a result effect in order to provide a strong 3D structure with an appealing aesthetic appearance.
Regarding Claim 13, Wang et al. as modified teaches providing the first frame (140 Figs. 1, 2 Par. 0058).
Wang et al. is silent on wherein providing the first frame includes molding the first frame.
However, Eder et al. teaches the use of molding to form the first frame (70 Fig. 1 Par. 0032).
In this particular case, the use of molding is common and well known in the art as evident by Eder et al. in order to form the first frame into the desired 3D shape prior to integration (Par. 0032).
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to provide the first frame of Wang et al. by molding based on the teachings of Eder et al. as a result effect in order to form the first frame into the desired 3D shape prior to integration into the device.
Regarding Claim 14, Wang et al. as modified teaches the method of claim 11 as shown in the rejection above. Additionally, Wang et al. teaches “The antenna array may also be secured to the support member 140 using other suitable mechanisms, such as a laser direct structuring (LDS) process” Par. 0068.
Wang et al. is silent on wherein affixing the radiating element includes, prior to affixing the second frame: (i) activating a region of the carrier surface, and (ii) depositing the radiating element onto the activated region.
However, Eder et al. teaches “With LDS technology, an antenna pattern is shaped with a laser on a plastic surface, and the energy provided by the laser allows the excited area to be subsequently plated with metal” (Par. 0008).
In this particular case, using Laser Direct Structure (LDS) process for forming antennas on a carrier is common and well known in the art as a process of (i) activating a region of the carrier surface, and (ii) depositing the radiating element onto the activated region as evident by Eder et al. Par. 0007-0008.
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to prior to affix the antenna of Wang et al. to the carrier surface, to (i) activating a region of the carrier surface, and (ii) depositing the radiating element onto the activated region which is known as Laser Direct Structure (LDS) based on the teachings of Wang et al. and Eder et al. as a result effect in order to provide a flexible method of forming the antenna on the carrier surface.
Regarding Claim 15, Wang et al. as modified teaches further comprising: installing an internal component of the mobile computing device into the housing interior (“The inner surfaces 144 of the top portion 140 a, bottom portion 140 b, and two side portions 140 c and 140 d collectively form a rectangular perimeter that defines a central region for receiving hardware components, such as a battery 154 and some of the electronic components populated on the PCB 150” Figs. 1, 2 Par. 0059).
Wang et al. is silent on securing the internal component to an anchor of the first frame.
However, Eder et al. teaches the use of anchors (bosses 429 Fig. 5 Par. 0040).
In this particular case, providing an anchor/bosses is common and well known in the art as evident by Eder et al. to use a fastener to secure components within a housing.
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to provide the first frame of Wang et al. with an anchor based on the teachings of Eder et al. as a result effect in order to use a fastener to secure components within the housing.
Regarding Claim 16, Wang et al. as modified teaches further comprising: applying a cover (170 Figs. 1, 2 Par. 0059) to the first frame (better seen in Fig. 1), to enclose the first frame between the cover and the second frame (as can be seen in Figs. 1 & 2 when the device is assembled, the first frame 140 would be enclosed within the frame/bezel (not labeled) around 170 and second frame 160).
Regarding Claim 17, Wang et al. teaches a mobile computing device (10 Figs. 1, 2 Par. 0052, 0053), comprising:
a display (170 Figs. 1, 2 Par. 0059) defining a front surface of the mobile computing device (“the term “front” refers to the surface of the device on which screen 170 is located” Figs. 1, 2 Par. 0054);
a housing (158 Fig. 2 Par. 0053) including:
(i) a first frame (140 Figs. 1, 2 Par. 0058) including a perimeter wall (144 Figs. 1, 2 Par. 0059) encircling a housing interior (internal space of the housing Figs. 1, 2 Par. 0059), the perimeter wall (140 Fig. 2 Par. 0059) having a carrier surface (146 / vertical portions of 140 Figs. 1, 2 Par. 0059) facing outwards from the housing interior (Figs. 1, 2), the carrier surface defining an outer surface of the perimeter wall (146 defining outer surface of perimeter wall 140 as seen in Figs. 1, 2);
(ii) an antenna (300 Figs. 1, 2 Par. 0058) having a radiating element (vertical portion of 300 better seen in Fig. 1 / 306-309 better seen in Fig. 2 Par. 0101) affixed to the carrier surface of the first frame and separated from the housing interior by the perimeter wall (better seen in Fig. 1 vertical portions of 300 affixed to 146 and separated from the housing interior by the perimeter wall 144), the antenna having a feedline (feeding line 116 Fig. 3 Par. 0104);
(iii) a second frame (160 Fig. 2 Par. 0058, 0059) having (i) an inner surface facing towards the housing interior (inner / bottom surface of 160 as seen in Fig. 2), and (ii) an outer surface defining a rear surface of the mobile computing device opposite the front surface (outer surface of 160 Fig. 2), the second frame on the first frame (Fig. 2) to encase at least a portion of the radiating element between the carrier surface and the inner surface of the second frame (as seen in Fig. 2 upon assembly that 160 would encase the radiating element of antenna 300 between 146 and inner surface of 160); and
(iv) a cover defining a bezel for the display (frame/bezel (not labeled) surrounding screen 170 Fig. 2 Par. 0059), the cover affixed to the first frame (as can be seen in Fig. 1 the frame/bezel of screen 170 is affixed to the first frame 140).
Wang et al. is silent on the feedline extending through the aperture in the perimeter wall of the first frame; the second frame overmolded on the first frame.
However, Eder et al. teaches apertures in the first frame for feeding the antenna (127 a, 127 b, 127 c Fig. 2 Par. 0036, 228 a, 228 b Fig. 3 Par. 0038); and teaches “In an embodiment with a sandwiched antenna array or with an antenna array on the exterior side of the housing, the carrier (or one its layers, as appropriate) may include one or more apertures so that the conductive members may extend through the aperture(s) to make electrical contact with the antenna” (Par. 0010); and the use of overmolding to form 3D antenna structures (Par. 0027, 0040, 0041).
In this particular case, providing the antenna feedline to extend through an aperture in the perimeter wall of the first frame; and overmolding the second frame to the first frame are common and well known in the antenna art as evident by Eder et al. to provide access to the desired feeding location in a simplified design (Par. 0038) and to provide a strong 3D structure with a desired aesthetic appearance (Par. 0027, 0040, 0041).
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to extend the feedline of the antenna of Wang et al. through an aperture in the perimeter wall of the first frame and to overmold the second frame of Wang et al. to the first frame based on the teachings of Eder et al. as a result effect in order to provide access to the desired feeding location in a simplified design and to provide a strong 3D structure with an appealing aesthetic appearance.
Regarding Claim 18, Wang et al. as modified teaches wherein the cover is configured to engage with the second frame to enclose the first frame (“the display screen 170 is secured to a front of the housing frame 160” Par. 0066).
Regarding Claim 19, Wang et al. as modified teaches wherein the housing includes a plurality of antennas, having respective radiating elements (200, 300, 400, 500, and 600(1-4) Figs. 1-3 Par. 0058) affixed to respective spaced-apart regions of the carrier surface (Figs. 1-3).
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MICHAEL M BOUIZZA whose telephone number is (571)272-6124. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday, 9am-5pm, EST.
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 at (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.
/DAMEON E LEVI/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2845
/MICHAEL M BOUIZZA/Examiner, Art Unit 2845