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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 04/08/2026 has been entered.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, see Applicant’s remarks, filed 04/08/2026, with respect to claims 1-15 and 20 have been fully considered and are persuasive. The previous rejection of claims 1-15 and 20 has been withdrawn.
Applicant’s arguments, see Applicant’s remarks, filed 04/08/2026, with respect to the rejection(s) of claim(s) 9 under Le Naour et al. (WO 2012107656 A1) in view of Hasnain (US 2021/0184707 A1) have been fully considered and are persuasive. Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, a new ground(s) of rejection is made in view of Gorbachov (US 8,374,557 B2).
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) 9 and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Gorbachov (US 8,374,557 B2).
Regarding claim 9, Gorbachov discloses a wireless device (figure 1) comprising: one more antennae (114a and 114b); one or more front end modules (112), each front end module having a bandpass filter (158), an antenna port (118a) connected to one of the one or more antennae and forming a signal path with the bandpass filter, and one or more amplifiers (138), the one or more amplifiers being disposed between the bandpass filter (158) and the antenna (114a) in the signal path; and a first switch (Matching and Switching Network 148) coupled to the one or more amplifiers and coupled directly to the antenna port (column 4, line 36 – column 8, line 56).
Regarding claim 20, Gorbachov discloses the wireless device of claim 9 wherein the wireless device is a wireless mobile device or a wireless access point (column 5, lines 11-34).
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.
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.
Claim(s) 18 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Gorbachov in view of Yang et al. (US 10,425,982 B2).
Regarding claim 18, Gorbachov discloses the wireless device of claim 9. In addition, Gorbachov discloses wherein the one or more antennae comprises two or more antennae (114a and 114b, figure 1). Gorbachov does not explicitly disclose at least two of the two or more antennae being different types of antennae or having different polarizations. However, Yang et al. disclose a wireless device (figures 2a-b) comprises at least two of the two or more antennae (figures 3a-b, 307a and 313a) being different types of antennae or having different polarizations (column 4, lines 34-54; and column 8, line 13 column 9, line 47). Therefore, it would have been obvious for one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to adapt the different polarizations antennae of Yang et al. to the antennae of the wireless device of Gorbachov for enhancing communication reliability and mitigating interference.
Claim(s) 19 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Gorbachov in view of Le Naour et al. (JP 2008219868 A - See English Text).
Regarding claim 19, Gorbachov discloses the wireless device of claim 9. In addition, Gorbachov discloses wherein the one or more antennae comprises two or more antennae (see figure 1, antennas 114a and 114b). Gorbachov does not explicitly disclose at least two of the two or more antennae having least 20 dB of isolation between them. However, Le Naour et al. disclose a wireless device (figure 1) comprising at least two of the two or more antennae (antennas 1-5) having least 20 dB of isolation between them (page 1, last paragraph page 3, 1st paragraph; and page 5, "Isolation between close antennas: 20 dB; Isolation between furthest antennas: 30 dB"). Therefore, it would have been obvious for one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to adapt the teaching of 20 dB isolation between antennae of Le Naour et al. to the antennae of the wireless device of Gorbachov for isolating noise and reducing interference.
Double Patenting
The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory double patenting rejection is appropriate where the conflicting claims are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969).
A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on nonstatutory double patenting provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with the examined application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. See MPEP § 717.02 for applications subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA as explained in MPEP § 2159. See MPEP § 2146 et seq. for applications not subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b).
The filing of a terminal disclaimer by itself is not a complete reply to a nonstatutory double patenting (NSDP) rejection. A complete reply requires that the terminal disclaimer be accompanied by a reply requesting reconsideration of the prior Office action. Even where the NSDP rejection is provisional the reply must be complete. See MPEP § 804, subsection I.B.1. For a reply to a non-final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.111(a). For a reply to final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.113(c). A request for reconsideration while not provided for in 37 CFR 1.113(c) may be filed after final for consideration. See MPEP §§ 706.07(e) and 714.13.
The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The actual filing date of the application in which the form is filed determines what form (e.g., PTO/SB/25, PTO/SB/26, PTO/AIA /25, or PTO/AIA /26) should be used. A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/applying-online/eterminal-disclaimer.
Claims 1-18 and 20 are provisionally rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-7, 9 and 13-20 of copending Application No. 18/150,229 (reference application). Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because claims 1-18 and 20 of the present application are either anticipated or being obvious over claims 1-7, 9 and 13-20 of copending Application No. 18/150,229.
Regarding claim 1 of the present application, claim 1 of copending Application No. 18/150,229 encompasses all the claimed limitations including a front end module comprising: a bandpass filter;an antenna port for connection to an antenna and forming a signal path with the bandpass filter; one or more amplifiers, the one or more amplifiers being disposed between the bandpass filter and the antenna port in the signal path and being coupled to a first terminal of the bandpass filter; a second switch (one or more switches) coupled to the bandpass filter at a second terminal of the bandpass filter; and a first switch coupled to the one or more amplifiers and coupled directly to the antenna port.
Regarding claim 2 of the present application, claim 2 of copending Application No. 18/150,229 encompasses all the claimed limitations including wherein the one or more amplifiers comprises: a first amplifier disposed between the antenna port and the bandpass filter in the signal path; and a second amplifier disposed between the antenna port and the bandpass filter in the signal path, wherein the front end module further comprises one or more switches arranged such that the front end module can be configured in either a transmit path configuration by selecting the first amplifier or a receive path configuration by selecting the second amplifier.
Regarding claim 3 of the present application, claim 3 of copending Application No. 18/150,229 encompasses all the claimed limitations including wherein the one or more switches comprises: a third switch disposed between the bandpass filter and the one or more amplifiers in the signal path, the first switch and the third switch allowing the front end module to be configured in either the transmit path configuration by selecting the first amplifier or the receive path configuration by selecting the second amplifier.
Regarding claim 4 of the present application, claim 7 of copending Application No. 18/150,229 encompasses all the claimed limitations including wherein the first amplifier comprises a power amplifier, and wherein transmit power of the power amplifier is reduced without affecting the saturated output power of the power amplifier.
Regarding claim 5 of the present application, claim 4 of copending Application No. 18/150,229 encompasses all the claimed limitations including wherein the second amplifier comprises a low noise amplifier.
Regarding claim 6 of the present application, claim 6 of copending Application No. 18/150,229 encompasses all the claimed limitations including wherein the bandpass filter is in a small signal side of the power amplifier in the front end module.
Regarding claim 7 of the present application, claim 5 of copending Application No. 18/150,229 encompasses all the claimed limitations including wherein the second switch is coupled to the one or more amplifiers and to a third switch, the third switch being coupled to the bandpass filter, and a fourth switch and a fifth switch, the fourth switch being coupled to the fifth switch and to the bandpass filter, and the fifth switch being further coupled to at least one transmit node and one receive node.
Regarding claim 8 of the present application, claim 9 of copending Application No. 18/150,229 encompasses all the claimed limitations including wherein the bandpass filter is a 5 GHz bandpass filter or a 6 GHz bandpass filter.
Regarding claim 9 of the present application, claim 13 of copending Application No. 18/150,229 encompasses all the claimed limitations including a wireless device comprising: one more antennae; one or more front end modules, each front end module having a bandpass filter, an antenna port connected to one of the one or more antennae and forming a signal path with the bandpass filter, and one or more amplifiers, the one or more amplifiers being disposed between the bandpass filter and the antenna in the signal path; and a first switch coupled to the one or more amplifiers and coupled directly to the antenna port.
Regarding claim 10 of the present application, claim 14 of copending Application No. 18/150,229 encompasses all the claimed limitations including wherein the one or more amplifiers of each of the one or more front end modules comprises: a first amplifier disposed between the antenna port and the bandpass filter of the front end module in the signal path; and a second amplifier disposed between the antenna port and the bandpass filter of the front end module in the signal path, wherein each of the one or more front end modules further comprises one or more switches arranged such that the front end module can be configured in either a transmit path configuration by selecting the first amplifier or a receive path configuration by selecting the second amplifier.
Regarding claim 11 of the present application, claim 15 of copending Application No. 18/150,229 encompasses all the claimed limitations including wherein the one or more switches of each of the one or more front end modules comprises: a first switch disposed between the antenna port and the one or more amplifiers of the front end module in the signal path; and a second switch disposed between the bandpass filter and the one or more amplifiers of the front end module in the signal path, the first switch and the second switch allowing the front end module to be configured in either the transmit path configuration by selecting the first amplifier or the receive path configuration by selecting the second amplifier.
Regarding claim 12 of the present application, claim 14 of copending Application No. 18/150,229 recites wherein the first amplifier of each of the one or more front end modules if not inherent would be obvious comprises a power amplifier since the first amplifier is in a transmitting path.
Regarding claim 13 of the present application, claim 14 of copending Application No. 18/150,229 recites wherein the second amplifier of each of the one or more front end modules if not inherent would be obvious comprises a low noise amplifier since the second amplifier is in a receiving path.
Regarding claim 14 of the present application, claim 16 of copending Application No. 18/150,229 encompasses all the claimed limitations including wherein the one or more front end modules comprises one or more pairs of front end modules and wherein, for each pair of front end modules, the bandpass filter of one front end module passes a different frequency range to the bandpass filter of the other front end module, such that the passbands of the bandpass filters do not overlap.
Regarding claim 15 of the present application, claim 17 of copending Application No. 18/150,229 encompasses all the claimed limitations including wherein, for each pair of front end modules, the bandpass filter of one front end module is a 5 GHz bandpass filter the bandpass filter of the other front end module is a 6 GHz bandpass filter.
Regarding claim 16 of the present application, claim 18 of copending Application No. 18/150,229 encompasses all the claimed limitations including wherein the one or more front end modules comprises two or more pairs of front end modules and wherein the bandpass filters of one pair of front end modules are configured for use in a different geographical region to the bandpass filters of another pair of front end modules.
Regarding claim 17 of the present application, claim 19 of copending Application No. 18/150,229 encompasses all the claimed limitations including a region detector configured to detect a geographical region in which the wireless device is located and to automatically configure the wireless device for that geographical region by selecting a pair of front end modules configured for use in the detected geographical region for use in a transmit path configuration of the wireless device and a receive path configuration of the wireless device.
Regarding claim 18 of the present application, claim 20 of copending Application No. 18/150,229 encompasses all the claimed limitations including wherein the one or more antennae comprises two or more antennae, at least two of the two or more antennae being different types of antenna or having different polarizations.
Regarding claim 20 of the present application, claim 17 of copending Application No. 18/150,229 including 5 GHz and 6 GHz bandpass filters which are used for wi-fi communication which if not inherent would be obvious for the wireless device being a wireless mobile device or a wireless access point for operating in wi-fi.
This is a provisional nonstatutory double patenting rejection because the patentably indistinct claims have not in fact been patented.
Claim 19 is provisionally rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claim 20 of copending Application No. 18/150,230 in view of Le Naour et al. (JP 2008219868 A - See English Text).
Regarding claim 19 of the present application, claim 20 of copending Application No. 18/150,229 encompasses all the claimed limitations of claim 9. In addition, claim 20 of copending Application No. 18/150,229 further encompasses wherein the one or more antennae comprises two or more antennae. Claim 20 of copending Application No. 18/150,229 does not recite at least two of the two or more antennae having least 20 dB of isolation between them. However, Le Naour et al. discloses a wireless device (figure 1) comprising at least two of the two or more antennae (antennae 1-5) having least 20 dB of isolation between them (page 1, last paragraph - page 3, 1st paragraph; and page 5, "Isolation between close antennas: 20 dB; Isolation between furthest antennas: 30 dB"). Therefore, it would have been obvious for one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to adapt the teaching of 20 dB of isolation between antennae of Le Naour et al. to the antennae of the wireless device of claim 20 of copending Application No. 18/150,229 for isolating noise and reducing interference.
This is a provisional nonstatutory double patenting rejection because the patentably indistinct claims have not in fact been patented.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to QUOCHIEN B VUONG whose telephone number is (571)272-7902. The examiner can normally be reached 10:00-06:00PM M-F.
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, ANTHONY ADDY can be reached at 571-272-7795. 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.
/QUOCHIEN B VUONG/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2645
Prosecution Insights