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 .
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 12/11/2025 has been entered.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's amendments and arguments filed 12/11/2025 have been fully considered but they are moot in view of new grounds of rejection.
Moreover, claim 1 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention. Applicant discloses a to “receive a usage pattern based on the pressure data”. Here, the specification does not appear to provide support for a received usage pattern that is based specifically on pressure data. Moreover, there is no specific reference to “pressure data”. While pressure is mentioned there is no definition or scope for “pressure data” within the specification.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112:
The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention.
Claims 1 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention. Applicant discloses a to “receive a usage pattern based on the pressure data”. Here, the specification does not appear to provide support for a received usage pattern that is based specifically on pressure data. Moreover, there is no specific reference to “pressure data”. While pressure is mentioned there is no definition or scope for “pressure data” within the specification.
Regarding applicant amendments, Bas (US 2021/0058169 A1) does not specifically disclose however Yairi (US 2015/0077398 A1) discloses receive a usage pattern based on the pressure data (see “pressure data”, [0020]);
Bas does not specifically disclose however Yairi discloses the touch sensor data comprising pressure data applied by a body part of a user (see touch sensor data and pressure data [0035]);
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to combine the teachings of Yairi with that of Bas. Doing so would conform to well-known standards in the field of invention.
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) 1-5, 7, 9-19 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bas et al. (US 2021/0058169 A1) in view of Yairi et al. (US 2015/0077398 A1)
Regarding claim 1, Bas discloses a device, comprising: a plurality of touch sensors; one or more antennas; and processing circuitry coupled to the plurality of touch sensors and the one or more antennas, the processing circuitry configured to:
receive touch sensor data from the plurality of touch sensors (see [0061], see touch sensor [0064]);
store calibration (see storage and calibration data, [0035]) data in a memory of the device, the calibration data being indicative of a degree of antenna occlusion and comprising the touch sensor data (see degree of obstruction [0044]);
and comprising a placement of the body part with respect to the plurality of touch sensors (see hand [0023] and see fig. 1b with hand over sensors);
receive an indication of device interaction (see [0064], “processing subsystem 302 can translate touch events (see [0064], including taps and/or other gestures made with one or more contacts)”) based on the touch sensor data (see touch sensor [0064]); and
perform an action based on a prediction of antenna occlusion (“see [0039], a notification can be presented for the user to hold a device in a manner that prevents hand occlusion of the antenna, an impulse signal can then be transmitted and one or more impulse response signals can be collected”, therefore a notification that prevents means future event has been detected and prevented thus predicted to occur) based on the indication of device interaction (see [0039] “when a user is setting up a face-identification feature on a phone, a notification may be presented to collect images of the user using the device's camera while holding the device in a manner that does not obstruct antennas of the device”), wherein the action is configured to mitigate effects of the antenna occlusion (see [0039], “manner that prevents hand occlusion of the antenna”) the calibration data (see calibration data [0035]), and the usage pattern (see usage fig. 1B);
Bas does not specifically disclose however Yairi discloses receive a usage pattern based on the pressure data (see “pressure data”, [0020]);
Bas does not specifically disclose however Yairi discloses the touch sensor data comprising pressure data applied by a body part of a user (see touch sensor data and pressure data [0035]);
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to combine the teachings of Yairi with that of Bas. Doing so would conform to well-known standards.
Regarding claim 7, Bas discloses a method, comprising:
receiving, via antenna obstruction detecting logic, touch sensor data from an electronic device (see touch sensor [0061]);
receiving, at the antenna obstruction detecting logic, a usage pattern (see [0023], “Here, a user's hand 120 is positioned over electronic device 105. As a result, a signal from other device 115 may be blocked in its entirety from reaching an antenna or otherwise obstructed. ”) based on the touch sensor data (see touch, [0064]) the usage pattern comprising hand placement with respect to touch sensors of the electronic device (see [0064], “[0064] Touch sensor 352 can include, e.g., a capacitive sensor array with the ability to localize contacts to a particular point or region on the surface of the sensor and in some instances, the ability to distinguish multiple simultaneous contacts.”; Wherein further contacts are in regards to users hand and hand contact), hand movement with respect to the electronic device (see hand gestures [0064] wherein the plurality implies movement), or both; and
performing, via a processor, one or more actions based on a prediction of antenna occlusion based on the usage pattern (see [0045] wherein a method is used that alludes to antenna occlusion, see “For example, a predefined rule may indicate that a direction of arrival is not to be calculated when (for example) one or more particular antennas are obstructed, at least a predefined threshold number of antennas are obstructed and/or a degree of obstruction at each of one or more antennas exceeds a predefined magnitude.”), the one or more actions configured to mitigate effects of the antenna occlusion (see [0039], “manner that prevents hand occlusion of the antenna”);
Bas does not specifically disclose however Yairi discloses the touch sensor data comprising pressure data applied by a body part of a user (see touch sensor data and pressure data [0035]);
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to combine the teachings of Yairi with that of Bas. Doing so would conform to well-known standards.
Regarding claim 15, Bas discloses a tangible, non-transitory, computer-readable medium comprising computer-readable instructions that cause one or more processors to:
receive calibration data corresponding to antenna occlusion (see calibration data [0038]);
receive touch sensor data from a plurality of touch sensors (see touch sensor and known usage in [0064]);
receive an indication of a device interaction (see [0064], “processing subsystem 302 can translate touch events (including taps and/or other gestures made with one or more contacts)”) based on the touch sensor data (see touch sensor [0064]);
predict antenna occlusion (see [0039] “ notification can be presented for the user to hold a device in a manner that prevents hand occlusion of the antenna”, therefore, a notification to prevent a future event from occurring is a prediction) based on the indication of the device interaction (see [0039], “while holding the device in a manner that does not obstruct antennas of the device. As yet another example, during a set-up of the device or at another time, a notification can be presented for the user to hold a device in a manner”, therefore device interaction), the touch sensor data (”translate touch events” by “touch sensor” [0064]) and the calibration data (see “calibration data”, [0045]); and
execute a preventative measure to reduce or eliminate effects of the antenna occlusion (see [0039], “manner that prevents hand occlusion of the antenna”);
Bas does not specifically disclose however Yairi discloses the touch sensor data comprising pressure data (see touch sensor data and pressure data [0035]) applied by a body part of a user (see “finger” [0033]);
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to combine the teachings of Yairi with that of Bas. Doing so would conform to well-known standards.
Regarding claim 2, Bas discloses the device of claim 1, wherein the processing circuitry is configured to receive an indication of an impending hand placement associated with the device interaction (see [0039], “a notification can be presented for the user to hold a device in a manner that prevents hand occlusion of the antenna”).
Regarding claim 3, Bas discloses the device of claim 1, wherein the indication of device interaction comprises an indication that the device will be used to make a voice call (see “call” [0051]).
Regarding claim 4, Bas discloses the device of claim 1, wherein the indication of device interaction comprises an indication that the device will be used to play a mobile game (see [0051], “basic device features (e.g., use of primary functions of multiple apps, email apps, ability to place a non-emergency call,” which would include games as a well-known function of mobile phones).
Regarding claim 5, Bas discloses the device of claim 3, wherein the indication of device interaction comprises an indication that the device is being accessed (see [0051], “basic device features (e.g., use of primary functions of multiple apps, email apps, ability to place a non-emergency call”).
Regarding claim 9, Bas discloses the method of claim 7, wherein receiving the touch sensor data comprises receiving first touch sensor data at a first time and receiving second touch sensor data at a second time (see time [0039]).
Regarding claim 10, Bas discloses the method of claim 7, comprising receiving an indication of upcoming user interaction with the electronic device indicative of the usage pattern, wherein performing the one or more actions to mitigate effects of the antenna occlusion is based on the indication (see [0045] wherein a method is used that alludes to antenna occlusion, see “For example, a predefined rule may indicate that a direction of arrival is not to be calculated when (for example) one or more particular antennas are obstructed, at least a predefined threshold number of antennas are obstructed and/or a degree of obstruction at each of one or more antennas exceeds a predefined magnitude.”).
Regarding claim 11, Bas discloses the method of claim 10, wherein the indication of the upcoming user interaction with the electronic device comprises an indication of a transition from a first application to a second application.
Regarding claim 12, Bas discloses the method of claim 10, wherein the indication of the upcoming user interaction with the electronic device comprises an indication of a transition from a first device orientation to a second device orientation (see orientation [0055]).
Regarding claim 13, Bas discloses the method of claim 10, wherein the indication of the upcoming user interaction comprises an indication that the user is making or receiving a voice call (see call [0051]).
Regarding claim 14, Bas discloses the method of claim 10, wherein the indication of the upcoming user interaction comprises an indication that the user is playing a game on the electronic device (see apps, [0051], inherently some would include games).
Regarding claim 16, Bas discloses the tangible, non-transitory, computer-readable medium of claim 15, wherein the calibration data comprises data corresponding to antenna occlusion due to device orientation (see orientation [0059]).
Regarding claim 17, Bas discloses the tangible, non-transitory, computer-readable medium of claim 15, wherein the calibration data comprises data corresponding to antenna occlusion due to hand placement (see hand placement [0023]) or finger placement with respect to an electronic device, or both.
Regarding claim 18, Bas discloses the tangible, non-transitory, computer-readable medium of claim 15, wherein the calibration data comprises data corresponding to antenna occlusion (see users hand [0023]) due to head position with respect to an electronic device.
Regarding claim 19, Bas discloses the tangible, non-transitory, computer-readable medium of claim 15, wherein the indication comprises a usage pattern (see calls or messages, [0024]).
Claim(s) 6, 8 & 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bas et al. (US 2021/0058169 A1) in view of Yairi in further view of Das et al. (US 2024/0196343 A1).
Regarding claim 8, Bas discloses a method of claim 7, Bas does not specifically disclose however Das discloses wherein the one or more actions comprising powering off one or more occluded antennas, reducing power to the one or more occluded antennas, increasing power to one or more non-occluded antennas, or any combination thereof (see [0004], wee power of antenna is reduced based on obstruction of the antenna by human body part);
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to combine the teachings of Das with that of Bas. Doing so would improve Specific Absorption Rate (SAR) safety.
Regarding claims 6 and 20, Bas discloses the device of claim 1 and tangible, non-transitory, computer-readable medium of claim 15, wherein the preventative measure to reduce or eliminate the effects of the antenna occlusion comprises powering off one or more occluded antennas, reducing power to the one or more occluded antennas, increasing power to one or more non-occluded antennas, or any combination thereof (see [0004], wee power of antenna is reduced based on obstruction of the antenna by human body part).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to combine the teachings of Das with that of Bas. Doing so would improve Specific Absorption Rate (SAR) safety.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to K. WILFORD SHAHEED whose telephone number is (469) 295-9175. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday-Friday 9 am-6pm; CST; ALT Friday. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300. The examiner’s Supervisor, Jinsong Hu, can be reached at (571)272-3965, where attempts to reach the examiner are unsuccessful.
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 http://pair-direct.uspto.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.
/KHALID W SHAHEED/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2643
12/11/2025