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 Amendment
This Action is in response to Applicant’s amendment filed May 22, 2026. Claims 1-23 are still pending in the present application. Claims 8-23 have been withdrawn from consideration. This Action is made FINAL.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed May 22, 2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
In the interview on March 23, 2026, the Examiner and Applicant’s Representative discussed the claimed antenna’s construction corresponding application’s FIG. 2, in which element 254 represents the claimed antenna. Based on the figure, the Examiner agreed that amending the antenna which is an enclosed structure with an opening in the middle overcomes the rejections. However, the scope of the amended language “the conductive antenna component… defines a first opening in an interior portion” is much broader than the agreement. The Examiner submits that Rappoport teaches this feature in FIGs. 5 and 3.
FIG. 5 shows an electronic device’s “[a]ntenna structures 24 may include antenna resonating element structures such as antenna resonating element 34 of FIG. 3 and/or ground plane structures such as ground structures 32” [0038].
FIG. 3 teaches the claimed “a first opening in an interior portion” as follows:
PNG
media_image1.png
522
715
media_image1.png
Greyscale
The same response also applies to the argument on page 8 and 9.
Further, In response to applicant's argument that the references fail to show certain features of the invention, it is noted that the features upon which applicant relies (i.e., “[a] component, such as the electromagnetically transparent component, sits within this opening such that the antenna component does not physically interfere with the position of the operations of other components of the electronic device,” page 9) are not recited in the rejected claim(s). Although the claims are interpreted in light of the specification, limitations from the specification are not read into the claims. See In re Van Geuns, 988 F.2d 1181, 26 USPQ2d 1057 (Fed. Cir. 1993).
The Examiner submits, Rappoport’s teaching anticipates claim 1-7.
Further even if claim 1 were amended to include the feature “the conductive antenna component… defines a first opening in an [enclosed] interior portion”, the claim would have been rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 over Rappoport in view of new reference Li (see the detailed rejection below).
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.
(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 1-7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Rappoport et al. (US 2013/0076573, “Rappoport”.
Regarding claim 1, Rappoport teaches an electronic device (FIG. 5), comprising:
a housing defining an internal volume and an opening (FIG. 5, housing 12 includes internal volume 64 and an opening where display cover layer 60 is located );
a grounding component disposed in the internal volume ([0037], [0038]);
a rear cover disposed in the opening, an inner surface of the rear cover defining the internal volume (FIG. 5 housing wall 66 covers the internal volume 64); and
a conductive antenna component embedded within the rear cover (FIG. 5, [0036] “antenna structures 24 can be embedded within housing wall 66” ), the conductive antenna is electrically connected to the grounding component (FIG. 5, [0037] “conductive structures such as portions 70 and 72 of antenna structures 24 may be configured to protrude through the surface of housing wall 66 and may serve as one or more antenna terminals (e.g., antenna feed terminals such as feed terminals 42 and/or 44 of FIG. 3)”. [0038] “Antenna structures 24 may include antenna resonating element structures such as antenna resonating element 34 of FIG. 3 and/or ground plane structures such as ground structures 32”) defines a first opening in an interior portion (FIG. 3 shows “a first opening in an interior portion” of antenna structure 24);
PNG
media_image1.png
522
715
media_image1.png
Greyscale
and is disposed peripherally around an electromagnetically transparent component ([0040] “The antenna structures that are formed by fabrication equipment 79 may include conductive antenna structures such as ground plane 32 and antenna resonating element 34 of FIG. 3 and optional dielectric substrate structures such as structure 24SUB. Dielectric structures 24SUB may be, for example, a flexible printed circuit ("flex circuit") substrate formed from a sheet of flexible polymer such as polyimide, a rigid printed circuit substrate such as a layer of fiberglass-filled epoxy (e.g., FR4), a plastic carrier, or other dielectric substrate on which patterned metal traces have been formed to form conductive antenna structures 24. [0051] “the material of wall 66 may allow radio-frequency antenna signals from antenna structures 24 to pass in and out of device 10”).
Regarding claim 2, Rappoport teaches claim 1 and further teaches wherein the conductive antenna component is disposed outside the internal volume (FIG. 5, antenna structure 24 is located outside internal volume 64).
Regarding claim 3, Rappoport teaches claim 1 and further teaches wherein the antenna component is entirely embedded within the rear cover (FIG. 5, [0036] “antenna structures 24 can be embedded within housing wall 66” ).
Regarding claim 4, Rappoport teaches claim 1 and further teaches wherein an outer surface of the rear cover defines an external surface of the electronic device (FIG. 6, wall 66 has outer surface).
Regarding claim 5, Rappoport teaches claim 1 and further teaches wherein: the rear cover extends across a thickness defined between the outer surface and the inner surface; and the antenna component is disposed within the thickness (FIG. 5).
Regarding claim 6, Rappoport teaches claim 1 and further teaches wherein the rear cover comprises a plastic ([0057] “… antenna structures are located under an exterior housing structure such as housing wall 66 of FIG. 5, a housing wall formed by plastic 82 of FIG. 6, or a housing wall formed by overmolded plastic 66 of FIG. 9).”)
Regarding claim 7, Rappoport teaches claim 1 and further teaches wherein: the rear cover defines a second opening; and the first opening of the antenna component corresponds in position with the second opening (FIG. 5, [0037] “conductive structures such as portions 70 and 72 of antenna structures 24 may be configured to protrude through the surface of housing wall 66”).
The following section is to address paragraph (5) of the Response to Arguments section above.
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 1-7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Rappoport in view of Li et al. (“Integrated Loop Antenna for Smartwatch”, IEEE Xplore, 2021, 2 pages).
Regarding claim 1, Rappoport teaches an electronic device (FIG. 5), comprising:
a housing defining an internal volume and an opening (FIG. 5, housing 12 includes internal volume 64 and an opening where display cover layer 60 is located );
a grounding component disposed in the internal volume ([0037], [0038]);
a rear cover disposed in the opening, an inner surface of the rear cover defining the internal volume (FIG. 5 housing wall 66 covers the internal volume 64); and
a conductive antenna component embedded within the rear cover (FIG. 5, [0036] “antenna structures 24 can be embedded within housing wall 66” ), the conductive antenna is electrically connected to the grounding component (FIG. 5, [0037] “conductive structures such as portions 70 and 72 of antenna structures 24 may be configured to protrude through the surface of housing wall 66 and may serve as one or more antenna terminals (e.g., antenna feed terminals such as feed terminals 42 and/or 44 of FIG. 3)”. [0038] “Antenna structures 24 may include antenna resonating element structures such as antenna resonating element 34 of FIG. 3 and/or ground plane structures such as ground structures 32”) {defines a first opening in an [enclosed] interior portion}; and is disposed peripherally around an electromagnetically transparent component ([0040] “The antenna structures that are formed by fabrication equipment 79 may include conductive antenna structures such as ground plane 32 and antenna resonating element 34 of FIG. 3 and optional dielectric substrate structures such as structure 24SUB. Dielectric structures 24SUB may be, for example, a flexible printed circuit ("flex circuit") substrate formed from a sheet of flexible polymer such as polyimide, a rigid printed circuit substrate such as a layer of fiberglass-filled epoxy (e.g., FR4), a plastic carrier, or other dielectric substrate on which patterned metal traces have been formed to form conductive antenna structures 24. [0051] “the material of wall 66 may allow radio-frequency antenna signals from antenna structures 24 to pass in and out of device 10”).
Although Rappoport does not teach the conductive antenna component… defines a first opening in an [enclosed] interior portion, however, Li teaches the antenna structure “bending around to form a cylinder” (page 1609, right column FIG. 1 and FIG. 2) for communication in different bands (abstract).
It would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention for a person having ordinary skill in the art to include the feature the conductive antenna component… defines a first opening in an [enclosed] interior portion, as taught by Li in Rappoport to allow communications in different bands using a single antenna.
Further, Rappoport teaches all features of claims 2-7 (see “102” section above).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Jia et al. (“Miniaturized wearable watch antenna for wristband applications”, IEEE Xplore, 2019, 3 pages) teaches an antenna structure for a watch (see Figures 1, 5 and 6).
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 QUOC THAI NGOC VU whose telephone number is (571)270-5901. The examiner can normally be reached M-F, 9:30AM-6:00PM.
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, Rafael Perez-Gutierrez can be reached at 571-272-7915. 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.
/QUOC THAI N VU/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2642
Prosecution Insights