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
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) 1-8, 11-14, & 18-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Banba (US Patent 5446425), a reference of record.
As per claim 1:
Banba discloses in Figs. 1-4:
An apparatus comprising:
a printed circuit board comprising:
a first layer (layer between 21 & 22) comprising:
a first transmission line (microstrip conductor 31); and
a second transmission line (microstrip conductor 32) configured to electromagnetically couple to the first transmission line, the second transmission line including at least one bend (as seen in Fig. 2), the second transmission line spaced apart from the first transmission line to form a gap (space between 31 and 32) in the first layer between the first transmission line and the second transmission line (as seen in Figs. 1-4); and
a second layer (ground plane conductor 12) comprising a structure configured to provide a ground for the first transmission line, the structure including an aperture (rectangular-shaped cut portion 12c) positioned to at least partially overlap the gap in the first layer.
Banba further discloses that directional couplers may be formed of metal conductors (col. 2 lines 22-40).
Banba does not disclose:
a second layer comprising a metal structure configured to provide a ground for the first transmission line, the metal structure including an aperture positioned to at least partially overlap the gap in the first layer.
At the time of filing, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art for the ground plane conductor of Banba to be formed of metal, as a common material used for conductors as disclosed by Banba (col. 2 lines 22-40) and as well understood in the art.
As per claim 2:
Banba discloses in Figs. 1-4:
the second transmission line comprises a meandered transmission line (microstrip conductor 32 includes two right angle bends within the rectangular-shaped cut portion 12c, and 2 more right angle bends at each end, as shown in Fig. 4).
As per claim 3:
Banba discloses in Figs. 1-4:
the second transmission line includes at least three bends (microstrip conductor 32 includes two right angle bends within the rectangular-shaped cut portion 12c, and 2 more right angle bends at each end, as shown in Fig. 4).
As per claim 4:
Banba discloses in Figs. 1-4:
each bend of the at least three bends is approximately ninety degrees (90º) (as seen in Figs. 1-4, wherein the two vertical bends are shown as 90 degrees, and the two bends within the cut portion are shown to be 90 as the transmission line makes a 180 degree direction turn).
As per claim 5:
Banba discloses in Figs. 1-4:
the aperture of the structure in the second layer is positioned such that an axis that is substantially perpendicular to the second layer extends through the gap and the aperture.
Banba does not disclose:
The structure is a metal structure.
As a consequence of the combination of claim 1, the structure is a metal structure.
As per claim 6:
Banba discloses in Figs. 1-4:
a plane (vertical in Figs. 3-4, view direction in Figs. 1-2) that contains the axis is substantially perpendicular to the first layer and the second layer;
the plane extends through the aperture in a first dimension of the plane, and the plane extends along a length of the aperture in a second dimension of the plane; and
the plane avoids intersecting the first transmission line and the second transmission line (as can be seen in Figs. 1-4).
As per claim 7:
Banba discloses in Figs. 1-4:
the first transmission line has a length (λg/4) and a width, the length being greater than the width (as per the definitions of length and width);
the aperture has a length and a width (being rectangular), the length of the aperture being greater than the width of the aperture (as per the definitions of length and width); and
the width of the aperture is greater than the width of the first transmission line (as seen in Fig. 2).
Banba further discloses the use of the cut portion 12 c of the ground plane to reduce the electrostatic capactiance (C1) to ground (col. 8 lines 10-27).
Banba does not disclose:
the length of the aperture is substantially equal to the length of the first transmission line.
At the time of filing, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art for the length of the aperture to be substantially equal to the length of the first transmission line, as the length of the aperture in part determines the distance of the transmission lines from the ground conductor, such that the length of the aperture is a design parameter for determining the electrostatic capacitance to ground as taught by Banba (col. 8 lines 10-27), thus determining the impedance of the directional coupler as is well understood in the art.
As per claim 8:
Banba discloses in Figs. 1-4:
the aperture has a slot shape (rectangular, as seen in Fig. 2).
As per claim 11:
Banba discloses in Figs. 1-4:
a third layer comprising a substrate (dielectric layer 21) disposed between the first layer and the second layer (as seen in Figs. 3-4); and
the third layer is substantially parallel to the first layer and the second layer (as seen in Figs. 3-4).
As per claim 12:
Banba discloses in Figs. 1-4:
the structure comprises a ground plane (ground plane conductor 12) relative to the first transmission line, the second transmission line, and other circuitry disposed on the first layer.
Banba does not disclose:
The structure is a metal structure.
As a consequence of the combination of claim 1, the structure is a metal structure.
As per claim 13:
Banba discloses in Figs. 1-4:
the structure is configured to provide the ground (ground plane conductor 12) for the second transmission line (as seen in Figs. 1-4).
Banba does not disclose:
The structure is a metal structure.
As a consequence of the combination of claim 1, the structure is a metal structure.
As per claim 14:
Banba discloses in Figs. 1-4:
the first transmission line and the second transmission line comprise a directional coupler (title) disposed in the first layer.
As per claim 18:
Banba discloses in Figs. 1-4:
An apparatus for electromagnetic coupling, the apparatus comprising:
a directional coupler (title) comprising:
a main transmission line (microstrip conductor 31) disposed in a first layer of a printed circuit board; and
a meandered transmission line (microstrip conductor 32, meandered by way of bends at bottom and top of rectangular-shaped cut portion 12c, wherein the specification notes that meandered transmission lines may have 3 or fewer or more bends [0078]) disposed in the first layer of the printed circuit board, the meandered transmission line configured to electromagnetically couple to the main transmission line, the meandered transmission line spaced apart from the main transmission line to form a gap (as seen in Fig. 2) in the first layer between the main transmission line and the meandered transmission line; and
a structure (ground plane conductor 12) disposed in a second layer of the printed circuit board, the structure comprising means for increasing a directivity of the directional coupler by reducing a coupling factor (rectangular-shaped cut portion 12c reduces a coupling factor by reducing electrostatic capacity C1, Col. 8 line 67-col. 9 line 7).
Banba does not disclose:
The structure is a metal structure.
At the time of filing, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art for the ground plane conductor of Banba to be formed of metal, as a common material used for conductors as disclosed by Banba (col. 2 lines 22-40) and as well understood in the art.
As per claim 19:
Banba discloses in Figs. 1-4:
the structure is configured to provide a ground for the main transmission line and the meandered transmission line (ground plane conductor 12).
Banba does not disclose:
The structure is a metal structure.
As a consequence of the combination of claim 19, the structure is a metal structure.
As per claim 20:
Banba discloses in Figs. 1-4:
A method of manufacturing a printed circuit board, the method comprising:
providing at least one substrate (dielectric layer 21) for the printed circuit board;
disposing on the at least one substrate a first layer comprising a first transmission line (microstrip conductor 31) and a second transmission line (microstrip conductor 32), the second transmission line configured to electromagnetically couple to the first transmission line (being a directional coupler, title), the second transmission line including at least one bend (as seen in Fig. 2), the second transmission line spaced apart from the first transmission line to form a gap in the first layer between the first transmission line and the second transmission line (as seen in Figs. 1-4); and
disposing on the at least one substrate a second layer comprising a metal structure (ground plane conductor 12) configured to provide a ground for the first transmission line, the metal structure including an aperture (rectangular-shaped cut portion 12c) positioned to at least partially overlap the gap in the first layer.
Banba does not disclose:
The structure is a metal structure.
At the time of filing, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art for the ground plane conductor of Banba to be formed of metal, as a common material used for conductors as disclosed by Banba (col. 2 lines 22-40) and as well understood in the art.
Claim(s) 2-4 & 18-19: (in an alternative interpretation) is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Banba (US Patent 5446425) in view of Wang (US PGPub 20230238677), both references of record.
As per claim 2:
Banba discloses in Figs. 1-4:
the second transmission line comprises a transmission line (microstrip conductor 32 includes two right angle bends within the rectangular-shaped cut portion 12c, and 2 more right angle bends at each end, as shown in Fig. 4).
Banba does not disclose (in the alternative interpretation):
the second transmission line comprises a meandered transmission line.
Wang et al. discloses in Figs. 9A:
A differential coupler wherein a second transmission line (102b) comprises a meandered transmission line.
At the time of filing, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to form the second transmission line as a meandered transmission line as per Wang et al. to provide the benefit of improving coupler directivity as taught by Wang ([0041]).
As per claim 3:
Banba discloses in Figs. 1-4:
the second transmission line includes at least three bends (microstrip conductor 32 includes two right angle bends within the rectangular-shaped cut portion 12c, and 2 more right angle bends at each end, as shown in Fig. 4).
Wang et al. discloses in Figs. 9A:
the second transmission line includes at least three bends (as seen in Fig. 9A)
As a consequence of the combination of claim 2, the second transmission line includes at least three bends.
As per claim 4:
Banba discloses in Figs. 1-4:
each bend of the at least three bends is approximately ninety degrees (90º) (as seen in Figs. 1-4, wherein the two vertical bends are shown as 90 degrees, and the two bends within the cut portion are shown to be 90 as the transmission line makes a 180 degree direction turn).
Wang et al. discloses in Figs. 9A:
each bend of the at least three bends is approximately ninety degrees (90º).
As a consequence of the combination of claim 2, each bend of the at least three bends is approximately ninety degrees (90º).
As per claim 18:
Banba discloses in Figs. 1-4:
An apparatus for electromagnetic coupling, the apparatus comprising:
a directional coupler (title) comprising:
a main transmission line (microstrip conductor 31) disposed in a first layer of a printed circuit board; and
a transmission line (microstrip conductor 32) disposed in the first layer of the printed circuit board, the transmission line configured to electromagnetically couple to the main transmission line, the transmission line spaced apart from the main transmission line to form a gap (as seen in Fig. 2) in the first layer between the main transmission line and the transmission line; and
a metal structure (ground plane conductor 12) disposed in a second layer of the printed circuit board, the metal structure comprising means for increasing a directivity of the directional coupler by reducing a coupling factor (rectangular-shaped cut portion 12c reduces a coupling factor by reducing electrostatic capacity C1, Col. 8 line 67-col. 9 line 7).
Banba does not disclose (in the alternative interpretation):
a meandered transmission line disposed in the first layer of the printed circuit board, the meandered transmission line configured to electromagnetically couple to the main transmission line, the meandered transmission line spaced apart from the main transmission line to form a gap in the first layer between the main transmission line and the meandered transmission line.
Wang et al. discloses in Figs. 9A:
A differential coupler wherein a second transmission line (102b) comprises a meandered transmission line.
At the time of filing, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to form the second transmission line as a meandered transmission line as per Wang et al. to provide the benefit of improving coupler directivity as taught by Wang ([0041]).
As a consequence of the combination, the combination discloses a meandered transmission line disposed in the first layer of the printed circuit board, the meandered transmission line configured to electromagnetically couple to the main transmission line, the meandered transmission line spaced apart from the main transmission line to form a gap in the first layer between the main transmission line and the meandered transmission line.
As per claim 19:
Banba discloses in Figs. 1-4:
the metal structure is configured to provide a ground for the main transmission line and the transmission line (ground plane conductor 12).
Banba does not disclose (in the alternative interpretation):
the metal structure is configured to provide a ground for the main transmission line and the meandered transmission line.
Wang et al. discloses in Figs. 9A:
A differential coupler wherein a second transmission line (102b) comprises a meandered transmission line.
As a consequence of the combination of claim 18, the combination discloses the metal structure is configured to provide a ground for the main transmission line and the meandered transmission line.
Claim(s) 9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Banba (US Patent 5446425) in view of Kane (US Patent 6822532), both references of record.
As per claim 9:
Banba does not disclose:
the aperture has at least one protuberance extending from the slot shape toward the second transmission line.
Kane discloses in Figs. 11 & 12c:
A differential coupler wherein the ground plane (metallized portion 46) has an aperture slot wherein the aperture has at least one protuberance (distributed protrusion 72) extending from the slot shape toward the transmission line.
At the time of filing, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art for the aperture of Banba to have at least one protuberance extending from the slot shape toward the second transmission line to provide the benefit of providing desired performance as is known in the art as taught by Kane (col. 8 line 35-col. 9 line 5) and provide higher capacitance as taught by Kane (col. 9 lines 21-38).
Claim(s) 15-17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Banba (US Patent 5446425) in view of Hanaoka (US PGPub 20190237843), both references of record.
As per claim 15:
Banba does not disclose:
the first transmission line is coupled between a first interface configured to receive a power amplifier and a second interface configured to be coupled to an antenna.
Hanaoka discloses in Figs. 1-2:
a directional coupler (11) comprising a first and second transmission line (111 and 112), wherein the first transmission line is coupled between a first interface (switch port Psw) configured to receive a power amplifier (amplifier circuit group 20, [0048]) and a second interface (antenna port Pant) configured to be coupled to an antenna (2).
At the time of filing, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to use the specific directional coupler of Banba for the generic directional coupler of Hanaoka as an art-recognized alternative/equivalent directional coupler able to provide the same function.
As a consequence of the combination, the first transmission line is coupled between a first interface configured to receive a power amplifier and a second interface configured to be coupled to an antenna.
As per claim 16:
Banba does not disclose:
the second transmission line is coupled between a third interface configured to be coupled to a controller and a fourth interface coupled to the ground.
Hanaoka discloses in Figs. 1-2:
the second transmission line is coupled between a third interface (coupling port Pcpl) configured to be coupled to a controller and a fourth interface coupled to the ground (through termination comprising C12 and R12).
As a consequence of the combination of claim 15, the combination discloses the second transmission line is coupled between a third interface configured to be coupled to a controller and a fourth interface coupled to the ground.
As per claim 17:
Banba does not disclose:
a radio-frequency front-end coupled to the printed circuit board, the radio- frequency front-end comprising the directional coupler; and at least one processor operatively coupled to the radio-frequency front-end, the at least one processor configured to coordinate transmission of one or more wireless signals using the directional coupler of the radio-frequency front-end.
Hanaoka discloses in Figs. 1-2:
a radio-frequency front-end (1) coupled to a printed circuit board (coupler integrated board 10), the radio- frequency front-end comprising a directional coupler (11); and
at least one processor operatively coupled to the radio-frequency front-end, the at least one processor (RFIC 3) configured to coordinate transmission of one or more wireless signals using the directional coupler of the radio-frequency front-end ([0050-0051]).
As a consequence of the combination of claim 15, the combination discloses a radio-frequency front-end coupled to the printed circuit board, the radio- frequency front-end comprising the directional coupler; and at least one processor operatively coupled to the radio-frequency front-end, the at least one processor configured to coordinate transmission of one or more wireless signals using the directional coupler of the radio-frequency front-end.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 10 is 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.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: the limitations of claim 10 combined with the limitations of claims 1 and 8 were not disclosed or rendered obvious over the closest prior art of Banba.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, see applicant’s remarks, filed 07/09/2025, with respect to Banba have been fully considered and are persuasive in regards to Banba not disclosing a metal structure. The 102 rejection over Banba of claims 1-6, 8, 11-14, & 18-20 has been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, a new ground(s) of rejection is made in view of Banba.
Applicant's arguments filed 07/09/2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive as far as the arguments that do not directly pertain to the structure being a metal structure.
On pages 12-13 of the applicant’s remarks, the applicant argues:
The Office Action appears to equate: the microstrip conductors 31, 32 of Banba to Applicant's claimed first and second transmission lines; the ground plane conductor 12 of Banba to Applicant's claimed second layer that includes a metal structure configured to provide a ground for the first transmission line; and the rectangular-shaped cut portion 12c formed in the center part of a ground plane conductor 12 to Applicant's claimed aperture positioned to at least partially overlap a gap in a first layer in the metal structure. Applicant respectfully submits that these equivalencies are incorrect.
Applicant respectfully submits that there is no teaching or suggestion in Banba of a second layer that comprises a metal structure configured to provide a ground for the first transmission line. This element is completely missing from Banba. The Office Action appears to assert that Banba's microstrip conductors 31, 32 are equivalent to Applicant's claimed first and second transmission lines. However, there is no teaching or suggestion in Banba of a second layer metal structure that is configured to provide a groundfor one of the microstrip conductors 31 or 32. In contrast, as shown in FIG. 3 of Banba above, Banba discloses microstrip conductors 31, 32 in a second dielectric layer 22 formed on the second surface of the first dielectric layer 21, in which, the first dielectric layer 21 is layered between the microstrip conductors and the ground plane conductor 12.
Further, Applicant respectfully submits that there is no teaching or suggestion in Banba of a metal structure (that is configured to provide a ground for the first transmission line) that includes an aperture positioned to at least partially overlap a gap (the gap between the first and second transmission lines) in the first layer. This element is completely missing from Banba. The Office Action appears to equate Banba's rectangular-shaped cut portion 12c that is formed in the center part of a ground plane conductor 12 to Applicant's claimed aperture positioned to partially overlap a gap between the first and second transmission lines in the first layer. In contrast, as shown in FIG. 3 of Banba above, Banba teaches rectangular-shaped cut portion 12c that is far wider than the microstrip conductors 31, 32 and the Zap between them in the second dielectric layer 22.
Quite clearly, Applicant respectfully submits that Banba does not teach or suggest: a metal structure (that is configured to provide a ground for the first transmission line) that includes an aperture positioned to at least partially overlap a gap (the gap between the first and second transmission lines) in the first layer.
In view of the foregoing, Applicant respectfully submits that independent claim 1 is clearly patentable over Banba and the other prior art of record.
Independent claims 18 and 20 recite claim features similar to independent claim 1. For example, independent claim 18 recites means for claim features that cover the aperture features to partially overlap the gap and independent claim 20 likewise covers the aperture features to partially overlap the gap, as well. Therefore, for the reasons stated above with respect to independent claim 1, independent claims 18 and 20 are also patentable over the prior art of record.
Applicant respectfully requests that the rejections of the independent claims be withdrawn and that these claims be allowed.
The examiner respectfully disagrees. Ground plane conductor 12 of Banba is explicitly noted as a ground plane in its label, and is located locally to the transmission lines of 31 and 32, noted as microstrip conductors. Cross-sectional figure 3 discloses ground plane conductor 12 is formed as a layer separate from microstrip lines 31 and 32 between layers 21 and 22, which form a first layer therebetween, and is therefore a second layer. There are no other ground planes provided, and thus the ground plane conductor serves as a ground plane for the transmission lines. This is further supported that at the portions of 51-54, the transmission lines are noted as coplanar waveguides, with the ground plane conductor 12 providing the coplanar ground plane of the transmission lines. As such, ground plane conductor 12 provides a ground plane for microstrip conductors 31 & 32. It should be noted that a microstrip conductor comprises a signal line and a ground plane separated by a dielectric substrate, with microstrip conductors 31 & 32 being separated from ground plane conductor 12 by dielectric layer 21.
The applicant further argues that “submits that there is no teaching or suggestion in Banba of a metal structure (that is configured to provide a ground for the first transmission line) that includes an aperture positioned to at least partially overlap a gap (the gap between the first and second transmission lines) in the first layer.” The applicant’s arguments are not commensurate with the claim language. The claim cites “an aperture positioned to at least partially overlap the gap in the first layer.” Figs. 1-2 show that the aperture (cut portion 12c) at least partially (as in including a range that includes totally) overlaps the gap between microstrip lines 31 and 32. The limitation of claim 1 as argued does not require the aperture to be less wide than the microstrip conductors and the gap between them. As such, the aperture (12c) meets the limitations of both claim 1 and claim 20.
Applicant’s arguments are thus unpersuasive except for regard to the requirement that the ground plane be metal.
Applicant’s arguments directed to claims 1 are further directed to claims 2-20, but are unpersuasive in the same manner as per claim 1.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SAMUEL S OUTTEN whose telephone number is (571)270-7123. 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, Andrea Lindgren Baltzell can be reached at (571) 272-1988. 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.
/Samuel S Outten/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2843