Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 17/878,527

KICKSTAND WITH INTEGRATED ANTENNA

Non-Final OA §102§103§112
Filed
Aug 01, 2022
Examiner
CHANG, DANIEL D
Art Unit
2844
Tech Center
2800 — Semiconductors & Electrical Systems
Assignee
Intel Corporation
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
91%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
1y 11m
To Grant
95%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 91% — above average
91%
Career Allow Rate
1100 granted / 1206 resolved
+23.2% vs TC avg
Minimal +4% lift
Without
With
+4.0%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Fast prosecutor
1y 11m
Avg Prosecution
22 currently pending
Career history
1228
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
3.0%
-37.0% vs TC avg
§103
32.2%
-7.8% vs TC avg
§102
48.1%
+8.1% vs TC avg
§112
11.9%
-28.1% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 1206 resolved cases

Office Action

§102 §103 §112
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 . Election/Restrictions Claims 19-21 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected invention, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Election was made without traverse in the reply filed on December 17, 2025. Remarks The Office has cited particular columns, line numbers, paragraph numbers, references, or figures in the references applied to the claims below for the convenience of the applicant. Although the specified citations are representative of the teachings of the art and are applied to specific limitations within the individual claim, other passages and figures may apply as well. It is respectfully requested from the applicant in preparing responses to fully consider the reference in entirety, as potentially teaching all or part of the claimed invention. See MPEP § 2141.02 and § 2123. Claim Objections Claim 4 is objected to because of the following informalities: In line 2, “a computer device base” appears to be “the base of the computer device”. See Claim 1, line 6. 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. Claim 8 is 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. Claim 8 recites the limitation "the stand" in line 3. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. It appears that the wording, “the stand” should be changed to “the support”. 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. Claim(s) 1, 2, 6, 8, 11, 13, 14, 16, 17, and 18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Slipy et al. (US 2013/0286623 A1, hereinafter “Slipy”). Regarding claim 1, Slipy discloses a kickstand (136) for a computer device (para [0045]), comprising: a support (an elongated arm/support 138, para [0034], [0036]; Fig. 3, 140,142) with a first end (inner end 140) and a second end (outer end 142), the second end configured to pivot when secured to the computer device (The outer/second end pivots outwardly from the device housing/base when secured, rotating away for deployment, para [0036]; Fig. 1-2, kickstand 136 pivoting via mechanism 134); and an antenna (“The kickstand mechanism can comprise… an antenna”, para 0023) for sending and receiving wireless transmissions, the antenna embedded within the support (para [0023], [0036]; Fig. 3, antenna 150 embedded in arm/support), wherein the kickstand is configured to interact with a base of the computer device to be retained in either a stored position or a deployed position (The kickstand interacts with the device housing/base (e.g., via modular mechanism and compartment) to retain in stored (closed/flush) or deployed (open/supporting) positions (para [0022], [0034], [0035]; Fig. 1-2, kickstand 136 retained in compartment 138 of base/housing 110). Regarding claim 2, Slipy discloses the kickstand of claim 1, wherein the support is made from glass-reinforced plastic (the support/kickstand made from impact-resistant plastic, which encompasses glass-reinforced plastic as a common equivalent for strength, para [0045]; materials include "impact-resistant plastic"). Regarding claim 6, Slipy discloses the kickstand of claim 1, wherein: the support is comprised of a non-conductive material (kickstand/support uses non-magnetic/non-conductive materials like plastic, para [0045]; "plastic, non-magnetic metal"); and the antenna is at least partially formed from metal deposited on the non-conductive material (Antenna is integrated/embedded in the non-conductive support, implying metal traces/deposition on plastic, para [0023], [0036]; Fig. 3, antenna 150 on arm). Regarding claim 8, Slipy discloses a computer device, comprising: a base (device housing/base with back surface, para [0034]; Fig. 1, housing 110); a support coupled to the base such that the stand can rotate away from the base (kickstand/support coupled to base/housing and rotates/pivots away, para [0023], [0034], [0036]; Fig. 1-2, kickstand 136 rotates via mechanism 134); an antenna for sending and receiving wireless transmissions with the computer device, the antenna embedded within the support (antenna embedded in support for device wireless transmissions, para [0023], [0024], [0036]; Fig. 3, antenna 150); and a retention mechanism configured to selectively retain the support to the base (modular mechanism (e.g., spring, cam) retains support in base compartment, para [0040]; Fig. 3, spring 178, cams 182-183). Regarding claim 11, Slipy discloses the computer device of claim 8, wherein the support is coupled to the base at a plurality of points (e.g., pivot shaft, clip, cams) to base (para [0039]-[0040]; Fig. 3, shaft 172, clip 176, cams 182, 183). Regarding claim 13, Slipy discloses the computer device of claim 8, wherein the base comprises a recess sized to receive the support such that a surface of the support is flush with a plane defined by the base when the support is within the recess (base/housing has recess/compartment sized for support/kickstand, flush when stored, para [0023], [0034], [0035]; Figs. 1, 6, compartment 130 receives kickstand 136 flush with back surface). Regarding claim 14, Slipy discloses a plurality of apertures that are positioned such that the plurality of apertures are exposed when the support is rotated away from the base (recess/compartment exposes speaker ports/apertures when kickstand rotates away, para [0023]; Fig. 4, speaker port 166 exposed). Regarding claim 16, Slipy discloses the computer device of claim 8, further comprising a hinge that rotatably couples the support to the base (pivot/hinge mechanism (shaft 172, cams 182, 183) couples support to base, para [0040]; Fig. 3, shaft 172), and wherein the antenna is connected to a transceiver within the computer device via a cable that passes through the hinge (antenna connects to device internals (transceiver implied for wireless device); connection routes through pivot/hinge area, para [0023], [0040]; electronic communications device with wireless capability, para [0045]). Regarding claim 17, Slipy discloses the computer device of claim 16, wherein: the support is comprised of a non-conductive material; and the antenna is at least partially formed from metal deposited on the non-conductive material (para [0023], [0036], [0045]; Fig. 3) Regarding claim 18, Slipy discloses the computer device of claim 8, wherein the computer device is a laptop or tablet computer (para [0024]; "tablet phone, android tablet, tablet device"). 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. Claim(s) 3, 4, 12, and 15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Slipy in view of Siddiqui et al. (US 9134808 B2, hereinafter referred to as Siddiqui). Regarding claim 3, Slipy discloses all the features and limitations as discussed above and further discloses pivoting primarily at the outer/second end but suggests inner/first end involvement (para [0034]); inner end pivotally connected, but does not explicitly disclose wherein the first end is configured to pivot when secured to the computer device. Siddiqui discloses dual-end peripheral hinges enabling pivoting at both ends for stability (Fig. 12; Fig. 14, hinges 1302a/b at ends). Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the features of Siddiqui into the device of Slipy to configure Slipy's first end to pivot similarly to reduce vibration (Siddiqui col. 8:1-20). Regarding claims 4 and 12, Slipy discloses all the features and limitations as discussed above and further discloses adjustment from 0° (stored) to deployed angles, para [0023]), but does not explicitly disclose wherein the kickstand is adjustable from 0 degrees to 140 degrees relative to a plane defined by a computer device base when the support is secured to the base or wherein the support can rotate from flush with the base to 140 degrees away from a plane defined by the base. Siddiqui discloses the kickstand that can be rotated to various positions to provide support for different orientations of the computing device (col. 1, ll. 47-56; Fig. 9-16). Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the features of Siddiqui into the device of Slipy for optimization for ergonomics (e.g., steeper viewing), as ranges are result-effective variables (col. 1, ll. 47-56; Fig. 9-16; routine experimentation for tablet support). Regarding claim 15, Slipy discloses all the features and limitations as discussed above and further disclose retention but does not explicitly disclose a protrusion. Siddiqui discloses protrusions (e.g., pivot protrusion 1426, Fig. 14) and detents to retain in recess (col. 10, ll. 32-64; Fig. 14). Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the features of Siddiqui into the device of Slipy for secure latching. Claim(s) 5 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Slipy in view of Uttermann et al. (US 2012/0194393 A1, hereinafter referred to as Uttermann). Regarding claim 5, Slipy discloses all the features and limitations as discussed above but does not explicitly disclose wherein the antenna is 17mm by 15mm in dimension. Uttermann discloses compact antenna dimensions fitting device cavities (para [0053]; e.g., <1cm scale; para [0071] - [0072]). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to incorporate the features of Uttermann into the device of Slipy since specific 17x15mm would be obvious design choice for Slipy's mobile antenna, as sizes are optimized for packaging/performance without undue experimentation. Claim(s) 7, 9 and 10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Slipy in view of Ouyang et al. (US 9,667,290 B2, hereinafter referred to as Ouyang). Regarding claim 7, Slipy discloses all the features and limitations as discussed above but does not explicitly disclose wherein the antenna comprises a plurality of in-phase traces and a plurality of out-of-phase traces. Ouyang discloses metal-deposited traces for antennas (Figs. 4, 6, 7; col. 8, ll. 49+; conductive traces on carriers) and further discloses phased arrays (col. 8, ll. 38+) with in-phase/out of-phase elements for beam steering (col. 7, line 60 – col. 8, line 15; see phase shifters). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to incorporate phased traces of Ouyang in Slipy's antenna for improved directionality in wireless transmissions (col. 1, lines 35-67). Regarding claim 9, Slipy discloses all the features and limitations as discussed above but does not explicitly disclose wherein the antenna is a first antenna, and the computer device further comprises: a second antenna disposed within the computer device; and switching circuitry to switch between the first antenna and the second antenna. Ouyang discloses multiple antennas (e.g., internal arrays as second) with switching circuitry to select based on performance (col. 3, line 51 – col. 4, line 18; control circuitry switches arrays) Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to incorporate the features of Ouyang into the device of Slipy to add second internal antenna and switching as taught by Ouyang for diversity, avoiding blockage when kickstand is stored (col. 3, line 51 – col. 4, line 18). Regarding claim 10, Slipy discloses all the features and limitations as discussed above and further discloses uses hall-effect sensor to detect kickstand position (stored/deployed) via magnet (para [0038]; claim 1) but does not explicitly disclose a sensor to detect when the support is retained to the base, and wherein the switching circuitry is to: switch to the first antenna when the support is rotated away from the base, and switch to the second antenna when the support is retained to the base. Ouyang discloses position/proximity sensors triggering antenna switching (col. 3, ll. 49-64). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to incorporate the features of Ouyang into the device of Slipy for Slipy's sensor to switch to kickstand (first) antenna when deployed (enhanced performance) and internal (second) when stored, optimizing RF based on configuration as taught by Ouyang (col. 4, ll. 1-18, Ouyang). Conclusion The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Ho (US 20160202733 A1) discloses tablet computer. Park et al. (US 9964998 B2) discloses hinge mechanism with multiple preset positions. Karacaoglu (US 9276624 B2) discloses antenna system with self-identifying antenna. Mercer (US 8654030 B1) discloses antenna placement. Park (US 9752361 B2) discloses multistage hinge. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DANIEL D CHANG whose telephone number is (571)272-1801. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8-5 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, Alexander Taningco can be reached at 5712728048. 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. /DANIEL D CHANG/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2844
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Aug 01, 2022
Application Filed
Mar 20, 2023
Response after Non-Final Action
Feb 26, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §102, §103, §112 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12600293
TANKER TRUCK WITH REAR LIGHTING ASSEMBLY AND METHOD OF OPERATION
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12603712
Antenna Adjustment Device and Method for Communication System
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12603650
ACTIVE GATE DRIVER
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12598686
CONTROLLABLE MULTIPLE LIGHTING ELEMENT FIXTURE
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12598687
Method for Configuring a Luminaire System and Device for Use Therein
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

AI Strategy Recommendation

Get an AI-powered prosecution strategy using examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Powered by AI — typically takes 5-10 seconds

Prosecution Projections

1-2
Expected OA Rounds
91%
Grant Probability
95%
With Interview (+4.0%)
1y 11m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 1206 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allow rate.

Sign in with your work email

Enter your email to receive a magic link. No password needed.

Personal email addresses (Gmail, Yahoo, etc.) are not accepted.

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month