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 § 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.
Claim(s) 1, 4, and 7-9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jeong et al. (hereinafter “Jeong”, US Pat No. 2019/0103653) and in view of Xing et al. (hereinafter “Xing”, US Pat No. 12,525,704).
As per claim 1, Jeong disclosed a millimeter wave signal transmission integration device (see fig. 2, see at least 0028-0029), comprising an antenna array module (see at least fig. 2, 230), used to transmit and receive a millimeter wave signal, and convert the millimeter wave signal to an intermediate frequency (IF) signal or convert the IF signal to the millimeter wave signal (see 0036 and 0056-0057), and signal, wherein the antenna array module comprises a frequency up-converting/down-converting module, which is used to downconvert the millimeter wave signal to the IF signal and up-convert the IF signal to the millimeter wave signal (see 0051-0052); a flexible substrate (see at least fig. 2, 202 and at least 0041), separated from the antenna array module, and connected to the antenna array module via a first connection interface (the antenna module 230 (RF chip 320) is disposed/mounted/arranged on the substrate 202 and is arrange to couple with connector 240 thru an interface (first interface)) and is used to transmit/receive the IF signal; a coaxial cable (see fig. 2, 250 and at least 0044-0045), connected to the flexible substrate, and used to transmit and receive the IF signal via a second interface (see fig. 2, 240); and a signal processing module (see fig. 2, 210), connected to the coaxial cable via a third interface (see fig. 2, 220), and used to transmit and receive the IF signal.
Jeong does not specifically disclose that the first interface utilization of Ipex connectors. However, Xing disclose an antenna module (see fig. 9, 61) coupled to the flexible substrate (see fig. 9, 30) thru an I-pex connection (see fig. 9, 31, col. 14/ln. 33-38). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary in the at the time of invention for Jeong to utilize an Ipex connector, as taught by Xing, to provide good contact performance thus ensuring effective transmission of the RF signal and improve performance.
As per claim 4, the improve antenna module of Jeong and Xing further disclosed an operating frequency of the millimeter wave signal ranges between 24.25 GHz and 52.6 GHz (see 0003, 0039).
As per claim 7, the improve antenna module of Jeong and Xing further disclosed an operating frequency of the IF signal is 10 GHz (see 0054).
As per claim 8, the improve antenna module of Jeong and Xing further disclosed a metal plate (see fig. 4, 0061), attached to one surface of the flexible substrate, wherein the one surface of the metal plate faces one other surface of the flexible substrate connected to the antenna array module.
As per claim 9, the improve antenna module of Jeong and Xing further disclosed the metal plate and the flexible substrate are jointly grounded (see fig. 4, 0061. See fig. 7, 702).
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.
Claim 6 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over the improve antenna module of Jeong and Xing and further in view of Pan et al. (hereinafter “Pan”, US Pat No. 2012/0235881).
As per claim 6, the improve antenna module of Jeong and Xing do not specifically disclose that the flexible substrate is a liquid crystal polymer (LCP) substrate. However, such is well-known in the art, as taught by Pan (see 0046). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of invention for the improve antenna module of Jeong and Xing to incorporate such claimed limitation in order to achieve lowest manufacture cost.
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.
January 16, 2026
/PABLO N TRAN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2643