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 § 102
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.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1, 2, and 6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) and 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Hwang US20200136257.
With respect to independent claim 1, Hwang discloses a multiband patch antenna [Fig. 2-5] comprising: a base substrate 113; an upper patch 120 disposed on an upper surface of the base substrate; a lower patch 110 disposed on a lower surface of the base substrate; a feed pin 130 which passes through the base substrate, the upper patch, and the lower patch; an antenna pin 140 which is spaced apart from the feed pin and passes through the base substrate and the lower patch to operate as a second antenna that resonates in a frequency band different from a frequency band of the upper patch [paragraph 30]; and an inner conductor disposed on an inner wall surface of a through-hole passed by the antenna pin to prevent deterioration of the isolation between the upper patch and the antenna pin [paragraph 44].
With respect to claim 2, Hwang discloses wherein the upper surface of the base substrate is divided into a first region where the upper patch 125 is disposed and a second region where the upper patch is not disposed [Fig. 5, the region 126 that is exposed around the upper patch 125].
With respect to claim 6, Hwang discloses wherein a first end of the antenna pin 140 passes through the base substrate and the lower patch, and a pin head is formed at a second end of the antenna pin [Fig. 3].
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.
Claims 10-12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hwang US20200136257 as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Ito et al. US20110260928.
With respect to claim 10, Hwang disclose the multiband patch antenna as recited in claim 1. Hwang fails to teach wherein the upper patch is provided with at least one accommodating groove formed therein for accommodating at least a portion of a pin head of the antenna pin.
Ito et al. teaches at least one accommodating groove 12c formed therein for accommodating at least a portion of a pin head 181 of the pin 18 [Fig. 5-6]. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to incorporate the teaches of Ito et al. to allow reliable soldering of the pin as taught by Ito et al. [paragraphs 19 and 48].
With respect to claim 11, Hwang, as modified above, discloses wherein the accommodating groove is formed by cutting off a portion of the upper patch, and is formed in a direction from a peripheral portion of the upper patch to the central point of the upper patch [Fig. 5-6 Ito et al.].
With respect to claim 12, Hwang, as modified above, wherein a number of the accommodating grooves is less than or equal to a number of the antenna pins [Fig. 4-6].
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 3-5 and 7-9 are 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.
With respect to dependent claim 3, the prior art fails to teach or reasonably suggest wherein the base substrate includes: a first through-hole which is formed in the first region through the base substrate, and through which the feed pin passes; and a second through-hole which is formed in the second region through the base substrate, and through which the antenna pin passes, in combination with the other limitations of the claim.
Dependent claim 4 is objected to by virtue of its dependency.
With respect to dependent claim 5, the prior art fails to teach or reasonably suggest wherein the antenna pin passes through the base substrate in a second region of the upper surface of the base substrate where the upper patch is not disposed, in combination with the other limitations of the claim.
With respect to dependent claim 7, the prior art fails to teach or reasonably suggest a first antenna pin which is disposed adjacent to a first side of the upper patch, and which passes through the base substrate in a second region of the upper surface of the base substrate where the upper patch is not disposed; and a second antenna pin which is disposed adjacent to a third side of the upper patch connected to a first end of the first side, and which passes through the base substrate in the second region of the upper surface of the base substrate where the upper patch is not disposed, in combination with the other limitations of the claim.
Claims 8 and 9 are objected to by virtue of its dependency.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claims 1-12 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Hwang et al. US20160013558 shows accommodation portion of the upper patch antenna portion 110 accommodates the head portion of the pin 150 [paragraph 65].
Hwang US20220102861 shows a patch antenna in which coupling gaps are formed between a lower patch and feed pins [Abs.].
Hwang et al. US20220311142 shows a multi-band patch antenna [Abs.].
Boudreau et al. US20240021995 shows a dual band radiating element comprising a stacked patch antenna [Abs.].
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Alexander Taningco whose telephone number is (571)272-8048. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri, 8am-4pm, EST.
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 WELLINGTON can be reached at (571) 272-4483. 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.
ALEXANDER H. TANINGCO
Supervisory Patent Examiner
Art Unit 2844
/ALEXANDER H TANINGCO/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2845
Prosecution Insights