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 .
Double Patenting
The non-statutory 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 non-statutory 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 non-statutory 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 non-statutory 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 1-20 are provisionally rejected on the ground of non-statutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-20 of co-pending Application No. 18/195,153. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because claims 1-20 of co-pending Application No. 18/195,153 encompassed all the claim limitation of the instant invention.
Regarding claims 1, 14, 18, and 20, claims 1 and 4-8 of co-pending Application No. 18/195,153 recited similar claimed subject matters: a multi-mode power amplifier system comprising at least one power amplifier having at least a first mode and a second mode, the at least one power amplifier configured to amplify a radio frequency signal (see claim 1 of cop-ending Application No. 18/195,153); and an output matching network including a first section and a second section coupled to an output of the at least one power amplifier by way of the first section, the second section including an inductor, a capacitor, and a switch (see claim 8 of co-pending Application No. 18/195,153); the switch configured to include the capacitor in an output matching impedance for the at least one power amplifier in the first mode and to not include the capacitor in the output matching impedance for the at least one power amplifier in the second mode (see claim 5 of co-pending Application No. 18/195,153).
Regarding claim 2, claim 2 of co-pending Application No. 18/195,153 recited similar claimed subject matters of claim 2 of the instant invention.
Regarding claim 3, claim 3 of co-pending Application No. 18/195,153 recited similar claimed subject matters of claim 3 of the instant invention.
Regarding claims 4 and 16, claim 7 of co-pending Application No. 18/195,153 recited similar claimed subject matters of claims 4 and 16 of the instant invention.
Regarding claims 5-6 and 17, claims 6 and 8 of co-pending Application No. 18/195,153 recited similar claimed subject matters of claims 5-6 and 17 of the instant invention.
Regarding claim 7, claim 9 of co-pending Application No. 18/195,153 recited similar claimed subject matters of claim 7 of the instant invention.
Regarding claim 9, claim 9 of co-pending Application No. 18/195,153 recited similar claimed subject matters of claim 9 of the instant invention.
Regarding claims 10 and 15, claims 9 and 15 of co-pending Application No. 18/195,153 recited similar claimed subject matters of claims 10 and 15 of the instant invention.
Regarding claim 11, claim 11 of co-pending Application No. 18/195,153 recited similar claimed subject matters of claim 11 of the instant invention.
Regarding claim 12-13, claim 12 of co-pending Application No. 18/195,153 recited similar claimed subject matters of claim 12 of the instant invention.
Regarding claim 19, claim 19 of co-pending Application No. 18/195,153 recited similar claimed subject matters of claim 19 of the instant invention.
This is a provisional non-statutory double patenting rejection because the patentably indistinct claims have not in fact been patented.
Claims 1-20 are provisionally rejected on the ground of non-statutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-20 of co-pending Application No. 18/195,189. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because claims 1-20 of co-pending Application No. 18/195,189 encompassed all the claim limitation of the instant invention.
Regarding claims 1, 14, 18, and 20, claims 1 and 7-11 of co-pending Application No. 18/195,153 recited similar claimed subject matters: a multi-mode power amplifier system comprising at least one power amplifier having at least a first mode and a second mode, the at least one power amplifier configured to amplify a radio frequency signal (see claim 1 of co-pending Application No. 18/195,189); and an output matching network including a first section and a second section coupled to an output of the at least one power amplifier by way of the first section, the second section including an inductor, a capacitor, and a switch (see claims 9-11 of co-pending Application No. 18/195,153); the switch configured to include the capacitor in an output matching impedance for the at least one power amplifier in the first mode and to not include the capacitor in the output matching impedance for the at least one power amplifier in the second mode (see claim 8 of co-pending Application No. 18/195,153).
Regarding claim 2, claim 2 of co-pending Application No. 18/195,189 recited similar claimed subject matters of claim 2 of the instant invention.
Regarding claim 3, claim 3 of co-pending Application No. 18/195,189 recited similar claimed subject matters of claim 3 of the instant invention.
Regarding claims 4 and 16, claims 9-10 of co-pending Application No. 18/195,153 recited similar claimed subject matters of claims 4 and 16 of the instant invention.
Regarding claims 5-6 and 17, claim 9 of co-pending Application No. 18/195,153 recited similar claimed subject matters of claims 5-6 and 17 of the instant invention.
Regarding claim 7, claims 12 and 15 of co-pending Application No. 18/195,153 recited similar claimed subject matters of claim 7 of the instant invention.
Regarding claim 8, claim 13 of co-pending Application No. 18/195,153 recited similar claimed subject matters of claim 9 of the instant invention.
Regarding claim 9, claim 12 of co-pending Application No. 18/195,153 recited similar claimed subject matters of claim 9 of the instant invention.
Regarding claims 10 and 15, claims 12 and 15 of co-pending Application No. 18/195,153 recited similar claimed subject matters of claims 10 and 15 of the instant invention.
Regarding claim 11, claims 4-5 of co-pending Application No. 18/195,153 recited similar claimed subject matters of claim 11 of the instant invention.
Regarding claim 12-13, claims 1, 14, 18, and 20 of co-pending Application No. 18/195,153 recited similar claimed subject matters of claim 12 of the instant invention.
Regarding claim 19, claim 19 of co-pending Application No. 18/195,153 recited similar claimed subject matters of claim 19 of the instant invention.
This is a provisional non-statutory double patenting rejection because the patentably indistinct claims have not in fact been patented.
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, 6-10, 14-15, and 17-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Samelis (US Pat No. 2015/0311874).
As per claims 1 and 20, Samelis disclosed a multi-mode power amplifier system (see 0062 and fig. 5) comprising at least one power amplifier (see fig. 5, 500) having at least a first mode and a second mode (see 0062), the at least one power amplifier configured to amplify a radio frequency signal; and an output matching network (see fig. 5, 520) including a first section (see fig. 5, 521) and a second section (see fig. 5, switched harmonic trap 522..523) coupled to an output of the at least one power amplifier (see fig. 5, 500) by way of the first section, the second section including an inductor, a capacitor, and a switch (the switched harmonic trap comprises inductor, capacitor and switch); the switch configured to include the capacitor in an output matching impedance for the at least one power amplifier in the first mode and to not include the capacitor in the output matching impedance for the at least one power amplifier in the second mode (see at least 0086, the switched harmonic trap can switch in for the first mode and switch out the capacitor in the second mode ).
As per claims 6 and 17, Samelis disclosed the inductor is a series inductor and the capacitor is a shunt capacitor (see at least 0013 and fig. 5, 520).
As per claim 7, Samelis disclosed the switch is on a semiconductor-on-insulator die (see at least at least 0012).
As per claim 8, Samelis disclosed a low noise amplifier (see fig. 1, 120) is on the semiconductor-on-insulator die.
As per claims 9-10 and 15, Samelis disclosed the at least one power amplifier is on a compound semiconductor die and wherein the compound semiconductor die is a silicon germanium die, and the semiconductor-on-insulator die is a silicon-on-insulator die (see at least 0012).
As per claim 14, as rejection above in claims 1, 6-7, and 9-10, Samelis further disclosed a multi-mode PA (see at least fig. 16).
As per claim 18, as rejection above in claims 1, 6-7, and 9-10, Samelis further disclosed an antenna (see fig. 1, antenna 146) operatively coupled to the at least one power amplifier by way of at least the output matching network in both the first and second modes of operation.
As per claim 19, wherein the multi-mode power amplifier system includes a baseband processor (see fig. 1, 110) configured to provide a mode select signal to the bias circuit (see fig. 15, 1060).
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) 2-3 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Samelis and in view of Zhitnitsky (US Pat No. 7,917,170).
As per claims 2-3 , Samelis disclose the device 1300 can include wireless local area network WLAN functionality and one or more features described herein can also be implemented in other wireless applications (see 0102) but not explicitly Bluetooth. However, such well-known application (Bluetooth) can be incorporate into the multi-mode communication apparatus of Samelis, such as taught by Zhitnitsky (see col. 2/ ln 49-col. 3/ln. 3), in order to provide ease and flexibility of use for the user.
Claim(s) 4-5 and 16 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Samelis and in view of White et al. (hereinafter “White”, US Pat No. 7,260,890).
As per claims 4 and 16, Samelis disclose such SIGE and SOI electronics components packaging technology (see 0012 & and at least 0014) but not SMT. However, such claimed packaging technology is notoriously well known in the art, as taught by White (see col. 7/ln. 46-62). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary in the art at the time of invention for Samelis to utilize SMT packaging technology, as taught by White, in order to utilize smaller electronic components and also reduce cost.
As per claim 5, the improve communication of Samelis and White further disclosed the inductor is a series inductor and the capacitor is a shunt capacitor (see Samelis at least 0013).
Claim(s) 11-13 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Samelis and in view of Ye et al. (hereinafter “Ye”, 2018/0131339).
As per claim 11, Samelis disclose a bias circuit (see fig. 15, 1060) and a multi-mode power amplifier wherein the multi-mode power amplifier including a main power amplifier transistor and an auxiliary power amplifier transistor (see fig. 4). Furthermore, Samelis disclose the teaching of selecting the desire mode upon bias to activate/ de-activate the required amplifier(s) but not explicitly configured bias the at least one power amplifier such that the main power amplifier transistor and the auxiliary power amplifier transistor are on in the first mode and the main power amplifier transistor is on and the auxiliary power amplifier transistor is off in the second mode. However, Ye teach the limitations as claimed, wherein the amplifier system (see fig. 7) comprises three different amplifiers such that the controller may select to activate the first and second power amplifier transistors of the multi-mode of the amplifier system in a first mode and select to activate the first power amplifier transistor and de-activate the second power amplifier transistor in the second mode (see 0084, the controller may select a mode by activate/de-activate any one of the unit cells 702, 704, 706). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of invention for Samelis to adopt such teaching if Ye in order to offer the benefits of high-linearity, low-noise, and high efficiency signal amplification.
As per claims 12-13, the improve communication of Samelis and Ye further disclosed the bias circuit is configured to provide a reference current to the at least one power amplifier, the reference current being different in the first mode than the second mode (see Ye, 0109-0111).
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.
February 19, 2026
/PABLO N TRAN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2643