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
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.
Claim(s) 1-4, 9-13, 16, and 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Tsai (US Pat No. 2014/0357208).
As per claim 1, Tsai disclosed a radio frequency module (see fig. 1), comprising a first differential power amplifier (see fig. 1, 110, fig. 4, 324 & 325) configured to amplify a first transmission signal and comprising a first transformer (see fig. 1, 152); and a second differential power amplifier (see fig. 1, 110, fig. 4, 324 & 325) configured to amplify a second transmission signal and comprising a second transformer (see fig. 1, 172); and wherein a first direction of magnetic flux generated in the first transformer and a second direction of magnetic flux generated in the second transformer are different from each other (see fig. 5-8, 0071, the magnetic fields induced in the first section 516 of first primary winding 512 of the first transformer may be anti-phase compared to any induced magnetic fields in the first section 528 of first primary winding 524 of the second transformer 524. As can be seen on fig. 5-8 the magnetic fields direction of the first transformer and the second transformer are different from each other).
Tsai does not specifically disclosed that the communication system is of a Carrier Aggregation transmission communication system. However, such transmission communication system well known in the art that the examiner takes Official Notice of such. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of invention for Tsai to adopt such transmission communication system in order to allow such a device.
As per claims 11-13, the improve communication of Tsai further disclosed such a Carrier Aggregation transmission communication system, wherein in the intra-band CA both of the signals in the first and the second frequency band that is defined by a fourth/fifth generation mobile communication standard can be simultaneous transmitted/received. And, wherein in the inter-band CA different frequency bands, such as the first frequency band that is defined by a fourth generation mobile communication standard and the second frequency band that is defined by a fifth generation mobile communication standard, both frequency bands can be simultaneous transmitted/received.
As per claim 16, the improve communication of Tsai further disclosed a signal processing circuit (inherently) configured to process a radio frequency signal passing through the radio frequency module.
As per claim 2, Tsai disclosed a radio frequency module, comprising a first differential power amplifier (see fig. 1, 110) configured to amplify a first transmission signal and comprising a first balun (see fig. 1, 106); and a second differential power amplifier (see fig. 1, 110) configured to amplify a second transmission signal and comprising a second balun (see fig. 1, 106); and wherein a first direction of magnetic flux generated in the first transformer and a second direction of magnetic flux generated in the second transformer are different from each other (see fig. 5-8, 0071, the magnetic fields induced in the first section 516 of first primary winding 512 of the first balun may be anti-phase compared to any induced magnetic fields in the first section 528 of first primary winding 524 of the second balun 524. As can be seen on fig. 5-8 the magnetic fields direction of the first transformer and the second transformer are different from each other).
Tsai does not specifically disclosed that the communication system is of a Carrier Aggregation transmission communication system. However, such transmission communication system well known in the art that the examiner takes Official Notice of such. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of invention for Tsai to adopt such transmission communication system in order to allow such a device for signals transmission simultaneously to increase data speed and bandwidth.
As per claim 3, see rejection above in claim 1
As per claim 20, see rejection above in claim 11.
As per claim 4, Tsai disclosed a radio frequency module, comprising a first power amplifier (see fig. 1, 110) configured to amplify a first transmission signal; a second power amplifier (see fig. 1, 110) configured to amplify a second transmission signal; a first inductor (see fig. 1, primary winding of 152) connected to an output side of the first power amplifier; and a second inductor (see fig. 1, primary winding of 172) connected to an output side of the second power amplifier; and wherein a first direction of magnetic flux generated in the first transformer and a second direction of magnetic flux generated in the second transformer are different from each other (see fig. 5-8, 0071, the magnetic fields induced in the first section 516 of first primary winding 512 of the first balun may be anti-phase compared to any induced magnetic fields in the first section 528 of first primary winding 524 of the second balun 524. As can be seen on fig. 5-8 the magnetic fields direction of the first transformer and the second transformer are different from each other).
Tsai does not specifically disclosed that the communication system is of a Carrier Aggregation transmission communication system. However, such transmission communication system well known in the art that the examiner takes Official Notice of such. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of invention for Tsai to adopt such transmission communication system in order to allow such a device for signals transmission simultaneously to increase data speed and bandwidth.
As per claim 9, see rejection above in claim 4, the improve communication of Tsai further disclosed the first power amplifier comprises a first differential power amplifier (see fig. 1, 110), the second power amplifier comprises a second differential power amplifier (see fig. 1, 110), the first differential power amplifier comprises a first transformer (see fig. 1, 152), the second differential power amplifier comprises a second transformer (see fig. 1, 172).
As per claim 10, see rejection above in claim 4, the improve communication of Tsai further disclosed the first power amplifier comprises a first differential power amplifier (see fig. 1, 110), the second power amplifier comprises a second differential power amplifier (see fig. 1, 110), the first differential power amplifier comprises a first balun (see fig. 1, 106), the second differential power amplifier comprises a second balun (see fig. 1, 106).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 5-8, 14-15, and 17-19 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.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed on 03/02/26 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
The Applicant’s stated that, “Tsai does not teach a first differential power amplifier "comprising a first transformer/balun" and a second differential power amplifier "comprising a second transformer/balun," as recited by claims 1 and 2, respectively. In response to the Applicant, the examiner agreed with the Applicant but the claimed limitation for which the Applied relied upon is not cited in the claims 1-2. Therefore, the rejections are proper.
The Applicant’s stated that, “Regarding claim 4, Tsai fails to teach or render obvious a first/second inductor connected to an output side of the first/second power amplifier, as recited by claim 4”. In response to the Applicant, the power combiner 440 comprising inductive components (see 0060-0061), wherein it clear that the inductive components consist of inductors and wherein the inductors of combiner 440 are servings as primary and secondary windings of the transformers of the power combiner. Therefore, the rejections are proper.
The Applicant’s stated that, “Tsai does not teach or suggest "a first direction of magnetic flux generated in the first inductor and a second direction of magnetic flux generated in the second inductor are different from each other”. In response to the Applicant, see rejection above in claim 1. Therefore, the rejections are proper.
.
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. 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 extension fee 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.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Pablo Tran whose telephone number is (571)272-7898. The examiner normal hours are 9:30 -5:00 (Monday-Friday). If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner's supervisor, Jinsong Hu, can be reached at (571)272-3965. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is (571)273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the
Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) System. Status information for
Published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR.
Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only.
For more information about the PAIR system, see httpr//pair-directauspto.gov. Should
You have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic
Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (in USA or CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
May 27, 2026
/PABLO N TRAN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2643
Prosecution Insights