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 .
Priority
Acknowledgment is made of applicant’s claim for foreign priority under 35 U.S.C. 119 (a)-(d).
Response to Amendment
The amendments filed on October 08th 2025 have been entered. Claims 1,3-13 and 15-24 are currently pending. Applicants’ amendments to claims have overcome the objections set forth in the Non-Final Office Action mailed on April 08th 2025.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claim 3 and 15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
The term “generally constant width” in claim 3 and 15 is a relative term which renders the claim indefinite. The term “generally constant” is not defined by the claim, the specification does not provide a standard for ascertaining the requisite degree, and one of ordinary skill in the art would not be reasonably apprised of the scope of the invention. For the purposes of examination, the examiner, as best understood, will interpret the claim to mean “a constant width” to bring the claim more in line with what is taught in the specifications and drawings.
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, 3-13, and 15-24 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ahmed et al. (US 20220192008A1) in view of Ram et al. (NPL from RFIC Lab of Changwon University and IDS Reference) and Hafeneister et al. (EP 2736053 B1).
Regarding Claim 1, Ahmed et al. discloses an antenna arrangement for an electronic key comprises (Vehicle access system includes a key fob 1032 that comprises an antenna arrangement from figures 1-9; Paragraph 98-99 and Figure 10 of Ahmed et al.)
an antenna (Portable network device 14 which may be a key fob includes an antenna 1414 which may be an antenna structure as disclosed in figures 1-9; Paragraph 99 and 123 as well as figure 14 of Ahmed et al.); and
an antenna circuit configured to control the antenna (Antenna system may comprise circuit components including a control module 1402 may be configured to control the antenna; Paragraphs 31 and 124-126 as well as figure 14 of Ahmed et al.); wherein
the antenna and the antenna circuit are arranged on a printed circuit board (Antenna 304, RF circuit, and other electrical components like the control module may be arranged on a printed circuit board; Paragraph 72 and 90 as well as figure 3 of Ahmed et al.);
the antenna arrangement is configured to transmit and receive ultra-wide band signals or signals according to a Bluetooth standard (Antennas discloses can be designed to transmit or receive in Bluetooth or ultra-wide band standards; Paragraph 28 and 95), and
the antenna circuit comprises a filter arrangement configured to filter signals received by and to be sent by the antenna (Transceiver unit 1408, which may also be disposed on the PCB, may be a part of the antenna structure and includes a filter arrangement in the form of bandpass filters 1518 or 1532 which filter received or transmitted signals; Paragraphs 127-129 and figures 14-15 of Ahmed et al.)
Ahmed et al. fails to explicitly disclose the filter arrangement comprises a capacitance formed by at least two conducting paths formed on the printed circuit board and wherein the capacitance comprises a bi-spiral shape comprising a first spiral conducting path and a second spiral conducting path spiraling into each other for at least three full turns.
However, Ram et al. does disclose a filter arrangement comprises a capacitance formed by at least two conducting paths formed on the printed circuit board (Band Pass filter comprises 2 conductive spiral arms now labeled Spiral 1 and Spiral 2 form a capacitance and filter is formed on a Teflon substrate which may serve as a PCB; Abstract and Section 3, Paragraph 1 as well as figure 1 of Ram et al.).
Hafeneister also discloses wherein the capacitance comprises a bi-spiral shape comprising a first spiral conducting path and a second spiral conducting path spiraling into each other for at least three full turns (Filter for radio broadcast application for vehicles comprise a capacitor connected coil formed by two interleaved spirals wherein said spirals spiral into each other for at least three full turns and generally have a constant width throughout; Paragraph 1-25 and 62-64 as well as figure 17a of Hafeneister).
Therefore, it would have been obvious before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art modify the antenna as taught Ahmed et al. to have a filter arrangement comprises a capacitance formed by at least two conducting paths formed on the printed circuit board as taught by Ram et al. to create a filter with strong capacitive coupling and maximize current at to enhance transmission at resonant band and attenuate outside this band (Abstract and Section 3 of Ram et al.). It would have been further obvious before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art modify the antenna as taught Ahmed et al. and Ram et al. to have the capacitance comprises a bi-spiral shape comprising a first spiral conducting path and a second spiral conducting path spiraling into each other for at least three full turns as taught by Hafeneister since the capacitance value depends on the width, length, and number of turns used in the spirals.
Examiner’s note - Regarding the recitation that an element is “configured to” perform a function, it is the position of the office that such limitations are not positive structural limitations, and thus, only require the ability to so perform. In this case the prior art applied herein is construed as at least possessing such ability. When the structure recited in the reference is substantially identical to that of the claims, claimed properties or functions are presumed to be inherent. The Courts have held that it is well settled that where there is a reason to believe that a functional characteristic would be inherent in the prior art, the burden of proof then shifts to the applicant to provide objective evidence to the contrary. See In re Schreiber, 128 F.3d at 1478, 44 USPQ2d at 1478, 44 USPQ2d at 1432 (Fed. Cir. 1997) (see MPEP § 2112.01, I.).
PNG
media_image1.png
674
498
media_image1.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image2.png
598
414
media_image2.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image3.png
544
535
media_image3.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image4.png
368
585
media_image4.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image5.png
351
707
media_image5.png
Greyscale
Regarding Claim 3 as best understood, Ahmed et al. fails to disclose the first spiral conducting path and the second spiral conducting path each have a generally constant width in a horizontal direction of between 0.1 and 0.2mm, wherein the horizontal direction is a direction parallel to a surface of the printed circuit board on which the first spiral conducting path and the second spiral conducting path are formed.
Although Ram et al. fails to explicitly disclose a width in a horizontal direction of between 0.1 and 0.2mm. Ram et al. does disclose the first spiral conducting path and the second spiral conducting path each have a width in a horizontal direction, wherein the horizontal direction is a direction parallel to a surface of the printed circuit board on which the first spiral conducting path and the second spiral conducting path are formed (Spiral arms 1 and 2 can have a width between .6mm – 1.3mm, S1 to S5, where this width direction is parallel to the surface of the substrate; Section 2b; Paragraph 2 and figure 1 of Ram et al.).
Hafeneister also discloses the first spiral conducting path and the second spiral conducting path each have a generally constant width in a horizontal direction (Filter for radio broadcast application for vehicles comprise a capacitor connected coil formed by two interleaved spirals wherein said spirals spiral into each other for at least three full turns and generally have a constant width throughout; Paragraph 1-25 and 62-64 as well as figure 17a of Hafeneister).
Therefore, it would have been obvious before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art modify the antenna as taught by Ahmed et al. to have the first spiral conducting path and the second spiral conducting path each have a width in a horizontal direction of between 0.1 and 0.2mm, wherein the horizontal direction is a direction parallel to a surface of the printed circuit board on which the first spiral conducting path and the second spiral conducting path are formed as taught by Ram et al., since it has been held that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or workable ranges involves only routine skill in the art. In re Aller, 105 USPQ 233 (CCPA 1955). The motivation stems from the fact that the size and physical dimensions of the filter affect its operating frequency (Section 2b, Paragraph 2 of Ram et al.). It would have been further obvious before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art modify the antenna as taught Ahmed et al. and Ram et al. to have the first spiral conducting path and the second spiral conducting path each have a generally constant width in a horizontal direction as taught by Hafeneister since the capacitance value depends on the width, length, and number of turns used in the spirals.
Regarding Claim 4, Ahmed et al. fails to disclose the first spiral conducting path and the second spiral conducting path each have a width in the horizontal direction of 0.14mm.
Although Ram et al. fails to explicitly disclose a width in the horizontal direction of 0.14mm. Ram et al. does disclose the first spiral conducting path and the second spiral conducting path each have a width in the horizontal direction (Spiral arms 1 and 2 can have a width between .6mm – 1.3mm, S1 to S5, where this width direction is parallel to the surface of the substrate; Section 2b; Paragraph 2 and figure 1 of Ram et al.).
Therefore, it would have been obvious before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art modify the antenna as taught by Ahmed et al. to have the first spiral conducting path and the second spiral conducting path each have a width in the horizontal direction of 0.14mm as taught by Ram et al., since it has been held that discovering an optimum value of a result effective variable involves only routine skill in the art. In re Boesch, 617 F.2d 272, 205 USPQ 215 (CCPA 1980). The motivation stems from the fact that the size and physical dimensions of the filter affect its operating frequency (Section 2b, Paragraph 2 of Ram et al.).
Regarding Claim 5, Ahmed et al. fails to disclose the first spiral conducting path is coupled to a first conducting path, and the second spiral conducting path is coupled to a second conducting path.
However, Ram et al. does disclose the first spiral conducting path is coupled to a first conducting path, and the second spiral conducting path is coupled to a second conducting path (Spiral arms 1 and 2 can be coupled to conducting paths now labeled Path 1 and Path 2 as seen in annotated figure 1 of Ram et al.).
Therefore, it would have been obvious before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art modify the antenna as taught Ahmed et al. to have the first spiral conducting path be coupled to a first conducting path, and the second spiral conducting path be coupled to a second conducting path to create a filter with strong capacitive coupling and maximize current at to enhance transmission at resonant band and attenuate outside this band (Abstract and Section 3 of Ram et al.).
Regarding Claim 6, Ahmed et al. fails to disclose the first conducting path and the second conducting path each have a width in the horizontal direction of between 0.5 and 1.5mm.
Although Ram et al. fails to explicitly disclose a width in the horizontal direction of between 0.5 and 1.5mm. Ram et al. does disclose the first conducting path and the second conducting path each have a width in the horizontal direction (Paths 1 and 2 can have a width W1 that is 2.1mm in a horizontal direction; Section 2b, Paragraph 2 and figure 1 of Ram et al.).
Therefore, it would have been obvious before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art modify the antenna as taught by Ahmed et al. to have the first conducting path and the second conducting path each have a width in the horizontal direction of between 0.5 and 1.5mm as taught by Ram et al., since it has been held that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or workable ranges involves only routine skill in the art. In re Aller, 105 USPQ 233 (CCPA 1955). The motivation stems from the fact that the size and physical dimensions of the filter affect its operating frequency (Section 2b, Paragraph 2 of Ram et al.).
Regarding Claim 7, Ahmed et al. fails to disclose the first conducting path and the second conducting path each have a width in the horizontal direction of 0.9mm.
Although Ram et al. fails to explicitly disclose a width in the horizontal direction of 0.9mm. Ram et al. does disclose the first conducting path and the second conducting path each have a width in the horizontal direction (Paths 1 and 2 can have a width W1 that is 2.1mm in a horizontal direction; Section 2b, Paragraph 2 and figure 1 of Ram et al.).
Therefore, it would have been obvious before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art modify the antenna as taught by Ahmed et al. to have the first conducting path and the second conducting path each have a width in the horizontal direction of 0.9mm as taught by Ram et al., since it has been held that discovering an optimum value of a result effective variable involves only routine skill in the art. In re Boesch, 617 F.2d 272, 205 USPQ 215 (CCPA 1980).The motivation stems from the fact that the size and physical dimensions of the filter affect its operating frequency (Section 2b, Paragraph 2 of Ram et al.).
Regarding Claim 8, Ahmed et al. fails to disclose the first conducting path and the second conducting path are 50Ω microstrip lines.
However, Ram et al. does disclose the first conducting path and the second conducting path are 50Ω microstrip lines (Narrow tuning stubs, aka path 1 and 2, are maintained at a 50omh impedance when coupled to the ports and thus serve as 50hom microstrip lines; Abstract of Ram et al.).
Therefore, it would have been obvious before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art modify the antenna as taught by Ahmed et al. to have the first conducting path and the second conducting path be 50Ω microstrip lines as taught by Ram et al. to create a filter with strong capacitive coupling and maximize current at to enhance transmission at resonant band and attenuate outside this band (Abstract and Section 3 of Ram et al.).
Regarding Claim 9, Ahmed et al. fails to disclose the at least two conducting paths comprise copper.
However, Ram et al. does disclose the at least two conducting paths comprise copper (Antenna filter with its conducting paths are made from copper as seen in figure 4 of Ram et al.).
Therefore, it would have been obvious before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art modify the antenna as taught by Ahmed et al. to have the at least two conducting paths comprise copper as taught by Ram et al. to create a filter with strong capacitive coupling and maximize current at to enhance transmission at resonant band and attenuate outside this band (Abstract and Section 3 of Ram et al.).
Regarding Claim 10, Ram et al. fails to disclose the at least two conducting paths have a thickness in a vertical direction (z) of between 0.4 and 0.6mm, wherein the vertical direction (z) is a direction perpendicular to the surface of the printed circuit board on which the conducting paths are formed.
Although Ram et al. fails to disclose a thickness in a vertical direction (z) of between 0.4 and 0.6mm. Ram et al. does disclose the at least two conducting paths have a thickness in a vertical direction (z), wherein the vertical direction (z) is a direction perpendicular to the surface of the printed circuit board on which the conducting paths are formed (Filter is formed on surface of substrate with a thickness of .504mm with a photolithographic and etching technique resulting in a filter with a thickness, at the very least, less than the thickness of the substrate wherein the thickness direction is perpendicular to the surface of the substrate; Section 2b, Paragraph 2 and Section 3 Paragraph 1 of Ram et al.) .
Therefore, it would have been obvious before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art modify the antenna as taught by Ahmed et al. to have the at least two conducting paths have a thickness in a vertical direction (z) of between 0.4 and 0.6mm, wherein the vertical direction (z) is a direction perpendicular to the surface of the printed circuit board on which the conducting paths are formed as taught by Ram et al., since it has been held that discovering an optimum value of a result effective variable involves only routine skill in the art. In re Boesch, 617 F.2d 272, 205 USPQ 215 (CCPA 1980).The motivation stems from the fact that the size and physical dimensions of the filter affect its operating frequency (Section 2b, Paragraph 2 of Ram et al.).
Regarding Claim 11, Ahmed et al. further discloses the antenna comprises a conducting path on the printed circuit board (Antenna arrangement includes a transmission line 350 and antenna 304 that may be stamped or be a PCB trace being a conductive path on the PCB on which it is mounted; Paragraph 82-83 of Ahmed et al.).
Regarding Claim 12, Ahmed et al. further discloses the antenna is a monopole antenna or an inverted-F antenna (Antenna 304 may be a monopole antenna in the form of stamped, PCB trace, or flat electrode type antenna or may be any other type of antenna; Paragraph 82-83 of Ahmed et al.).
Regarding Claim 13, Ahmed et al. further discloses an electronic vehicle key comprising an antenna arrangement the antenna arrangement comprising (Vehicle access system includes a key fob 1032 that comprises an antenna arrangement from figures 1-9; Paragraph 98-99 and Figure 10 of Ahmed et al.)
an antenna (Portable network device 14 which may be a key fob includes an antenna 1414 which may be an antenna structure as disclosed in figures 1-9; Paragraph 99 and 123 as well as figure 14 of Ahmed et al.); and
an antenna circuit configured to control the antenna (Antenna system may comprise circuit components including a control module 1402 may be configured to control the antenna; Paragraphs 31 and 124-126 as well as figure 14 of Ahmed et al.); wherein
the antenna and the antenna circuit are arranged on a printed circuit board (Antenna 304, RF circuit, and other electrical components like the control module may be arranged on a printed circuit board; Paragraph 72 and 90 as well as figure 3 of Ahmed et al.);
the antenna arrangement is configured to transmit and receive ultra-wide band signals or signals according to a Bluetooth standard (Antennas discloses can be designed to transmit or receive in Bluetooth or ultra-wide band standards; Paragraph 28 and 95), and
the antenna circuit comprises a filter arrangement configured to filter signals received by and to be sent by the antenna (Transceiver unit 1408, which may also be disposed on the PCB, may be a part of the antenna structure and includes a filter arrangement in the form of bandpass filters 1518 or 1532 which filter received or transmitted signals; Paragraphs 127-129 and figures 14-15 of Ahmed et al.)
Ahmed et al. fails to explicitly disclose the filter arrangement comprises a capacitance formed by at least two conducting paths formed on the printed circuit board and wherein the capacitance comprises a bi-spiral shape comprising a first spiral conducting path and a second spiral conducting path spiraling into each other for at least three full turns.
However, Ram et al. does disclose a filter arrangement comprises a capacitance formed by at least two conducting paths formed on the printed circuit board (Band Pass filter comprises 2 conductive spiral arms now labeled Spiral 1 and Spiral 2 form a capacitance and filter is formed on a Teflon substrate which may serve as a PCB; Abstract and Section 3, Paragraph 1 as well as figure 1 of Ram et al.).
Hafeneister also discloses wherein the capacitance comprises a bi-spiral shape comprising a first spiral conducting path and a second spiral conducting path spiraling into each other for at least three full turns (Filter for radio broadcast application for vehicles comprise a capacitor connected coil formed by two interleaved spirals wherein said spirals spiral into each other for at least three full turns and generally have a constant width throughout; Paragraph 1-25 and 62-64 as well as figure 17a of Hafeneister).
Therefore, it would have been obvious before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art modify the antenna as taught Ahmed et al. to have a filter arrangement comprises a capacitance formed by at least two conducting paths formed on the printed circuit board as taught by Ram et al. to create a filter with strong capacitive coupling and maximize current at to enhance transmission at resonant band and attenuate outside this band (Abstract and Section 3 of Ram et al.). It would have been further obvious before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art modify the antenna as taught Ahmed et al. and Ram et al. to have the capacitance comprises a bi-spiral shape comprising a first spiral conducting path and a second spiral conducting path spiraling into each other for at least three full turns as taught by Hafeneister since the capacitance value depends on the width, length, and number of turns used in the spirals.
Examiner’s note - Regarding the recitation that an element is “configured to” perform a function, it is the position of the office that such limitations are not positive structural limitations, and thus, only require the ability to so perform. In this case the prior art applied herein is construed as at least possessing such ability. When the structure recited in the reference is substantially identical to that of the claims, claimed properties or functions are presumed to be inherent. The Courts have held that it is well settled that where there is a reason to believe that a functional characteristic would be inherent in the prior art, the burden of proof then shifts to the applicant to provide objective evidence to the contrary. See In re Schreiber, 128 F.3d at 1478, 44 USPQ2d at 1478, 44 USPQ2d at 1432 (Fed. Cir. 1997) (see MPEP § 2112.01, I.).
Regarding Claim 15, Ahmed et al. fails to disclose the first spiral conducting path and the second spiral conducting path each have a generally constant width in a horizontal direction of between 0.1 and 0.2mm, wherein the horizontal direction is a direction parallel to a surface of the printed circuit board on which the first spiral conducting path and the second spiral conducting path are formed.
Although Ram et al. fails to explicitly disclose a width in a horizontal direction of between 0.1 and 0.2mm. Ram et al. does disclose the first spiral conducting path and the second spiral conducting path each have a width in a horizontal direction, wherein the horizontal direction is a direction parallel to a surface of the printed circuit board on which the first spiral conducting path and the second spiral conducting path are formed (Spiral arms 1 and 2 can have a width between .6mm – 1.3mm, S1 to S5, where this width direction is parallel to the surface of the substrate; Section 2b; Paragraph 2 and figure 1 of Ram et al.).
Hafeneister also discloses the first spiral conducting path and the second spiral conducting path each have a generally constant width in a horizontal direction (Filter for radio broadcast application for vehicles comprise a capacitor connected coil formed by two interleaved spirals wherein said spirals spiral into each other for at least three full turns and generally have a constant width throughout; Paragraph 1-25 and 62-64 as well as figure 17a of Hafeneister).
Therefore, it would have been obvious before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art modify the antenna as taught by Ahmed et al. to have the first spiral conducting path and the second spiral conducting path each have a width in a horizontal direction of between 0.1 and 0.2mm, wherein the horizontal direction is a direction parallel to a surface of the printed circuit board on which the first spiral conducting path and the second spiral conducting path are formed as taught by Ram et al., since it has been held that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or workable ranges involves only routine skill in the art. In re Aller, 105 USPQ 233 (CCPA 1955). The motivation stems from the fact that the size and physical dimensions of the filter affect its operating frequency (Section 2b, Paragraph 2 of Ram et al.). It would have been further obvious before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art modify the antenna as taught Ahmed et al. and Ram et al. to have the first spiral conducting path and the second spiral conducting path each have a generally constant width in a horizontal direction as taught by Hafeneister since the capacitance value depends on the width, length, and number of turns used in the spirals.
Regarding Claim 16, Ahmed et al. fails to disclose the first spiral conducting path and the second spiral conducting path each have a width in the horizontal direction of 0.14mm.
Although Ram et al. fails to explicitly disclose a width in the horizontal direction of 0.14mm. Ram et al. does disclose the first spiral conducting path and the second spiral conducting path each have a width in the horizontal direction (Spiral arms 1 and 2 can have a width between .6mm – 1.3mm, S1 to S5, where this width direction is parallel to the surface of the substrate; Section 2b; Paragraph 2 and figure 1 of Ram et al.).
Therefore, it would have been obvious before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art modify the antenna as taught by Ahmed et al. to have the first spiral conducting path and the second spiral conducting path each have a width in the horizontal direction of 0.14mm as taught by Ram et al., since it has been held that discovering an optimum value of a result effective variable involves only routine skill in the art. In re Boesch, 617 F.2d 272, 205 USPQ 215 (CCPA 1980). The motivation stems from the fact that the size and physical dimensions of the filter affect its operating frequency (Section 2b, Paragraph 2 of Ram et al.).
Regarding Claim 17, Ahmed et al. fails to disclose the first spiral conducting path is coupled to a first conducting path, and the second spiral conducting path is coupled to a second conducting path.
However, Ram et al. does disclose the first spiral conducting path is coupled to a first conducting path, and the second spiral conducting path is coupled to a second conducting path (Spiral arms 1 and 2 can be coupled to conducting paths now labeled Path 1 and Path 2 as seen in annotated figure 1 of Ram et al.).
Therefore, it would have been obvious before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art modify the antenna as taught Ahmed et al. to have the first spiral conducting path be coupled to a first conducting path, and the second spiral conducting path be coupled to a second conducting path to create a filter with strong capacitive coupling and maximize current at to enhance transmission at resonant band and attenuate outside this band (Abstract and Section 3 of Ram et al.).
Regarding Claim 18, Ahmed et al. fails to disclose the first conducting path and the second conducting path each have a width in the horizontal direction of between 0.5 and 1.5mm.
Although Ram et al. fails to explicitly disclose a width in the horizontal direction of between 0.5 and 1.5mm. Ram et al. does disclose the first conducting path and the second conducting path each have a width in the horizontal direction (Paths 1 and 2 can have a width W1 that is 2.1mm in a horizontal direction; Section 2b, Paragraph 2 and figure 1 of Ram et al.).
Therefore, it would have been obvious before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art modify the antenna as taught by Ahmed et al. to have the first conducting path and the second conducting path each have a width in the horizontal direction of between 0.5 and 1.5mm as taught by Ram et al., since it has been held that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or workable ranges involves only routine skill in the art. In re Aller, 105 USPQ 233 (CCPA 1955). The motivation stems from the fact that the size and physical dimensions of the filter affect its operating frequency (Section 2b, Paragraph 2 of Ram et al.).
Regarding Claim 19, Ahmed et al. fails to disclose the first conducting path and the second conducting path each have a width in the horizontal direction of 0.9mm.
Although Ram et al. fails to explicitly disclose a width in the horizontal direction of 0.9mm. Ram et al. does disclose the first conducting path and the second conducting path each have a width in the horizontal direction (Paths 1 and 2 can have a width W1 that is 2.1mm in a horizontal direction; Section 2b, Paragraph 2 and figure 1 of Ram et al.).
Therefore, it would have been obvious before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art modify the antenna as taught by Ahmed et al. to have the first conducting path and the second conducting path each have a width in the horizontal direction of 0.9mm as taught by Ram et al., since it has been held that discovering an optimum value of a result effective variable involves only routine skill in the art. In re Boesch, 617 F.2d 272, 205 USPQ 215 (CCPA 1980).The motivation stems from the fact that the size and physical dimensions of the filter affect its operating frequency (Section 2b, Paragraph 2 of Ram et al.).
Regarding Claim 20, Ahmed et al. fails to disclose the first conducting path and the second conducting path are 50Ω microstrip lines.
However, Ram et al. does disclose the first conducting path and the second conducting path are 50Ω microstrip lines (Narrow tuning stubs, aka path 1 and 2, are maintained at a 50omh impedance when coupled to the ports and thus serve as 50hom microstrip lines; Abstract of Ram et al.).
Therefore, it would have been obvious before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art modify the antenna as taught by Ahmed et al. to have the first conducting path and the second conducting path be 50Ω microstrip lines as taught by Ram et al. to create a filter with strong capacitive coupling and maximize current at to enhance transmission at resonant band and attenuate outside this band (Abstract and Section 3 of Ram et al.).
Regarding Claim 21, Ahmed et al. fails to disclose the at least two conducting paths comprise copper.
However, Ram et al. does disclose the at least two conducting paths comprise copper (Antenna filter with its conducting paths are made from copper as seen in figure 4 of Ram et al.).
Therefore, it would have been obvious before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art modify the antenna as taught by Ahmed et al. to have the at least two conducting paths comprise copper as taught by Ram et al. to create a filter with strong capacitive coupling and maximize current at to enhance transmission at resonant band and attenuate outside this band (Abstract and Section 3 of Ram et al.).
Regarding Claim 22, Ram et al. fails to disclose the at least two conducting paths have a thickness in a vertical direction (z) of between 0.4 and 0.6mm, wherein the vertical direction (z) is a direction perpendicular to the surface of the printed circuit board on which the conducting paths are formed.
Although Ram et al. fails to disclose a thickness in a vertical direction (z) of between 0.4 and 0.6mm. Ram et al. does disclose the at least two conducting paths have a thickness in a vertical direction (z), wherein the vertical direction (z) is a direction perpendicular to the surface of the printed circuit board on which the conducting paths are formed (Filter is formed on surface of substrate with a thickness of .504mm with a photolithographic and etching technique resulting in a filter with a thickness, at the very least, less than the thickness of the substrate wherein the thickness direction is perpendicular to the surface of the substrate; Section 2b, Paragraph 2 and Section 3 Paragraph 1 of Ram et al.) .
Therefore, it would have been obvious before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art modify the antenna as taught by Ahmed et al. to have the at least two conducting paths have a thickness in a vertical direction (z) of between 0.4 and 0.6mm, wherein the vertical direction (z) is a direction perpendicular to the surface of the printed circuit board on which the conducting paths are formed as taught by Ram et al., since it has been held that discovering an optimum value of a result effective variable involves only routine skill in the art. In re Boesch, 617 F.2d 272, 205 USPQ 215 (CCPA 1980).The motivation stems from the fact that the size and physical dimensions of the filter affect its operating frequency (Section 2b, Paragraph 2 of Ram et al.).
Regarding Claim 23, Ahmed et al. further discloses the antenna comprises a conducting path on the printed circuit board (Antenna arrangement includes a transmission line 350 and antenna 304 that may be stamped or be a PCB trace being a conductive path on the PCB on which it is mounted; Paragraph 82-83 of Ahmed et al.).
Regarding Claim 24, Ahmed et al. further discloses the antenna is a monopole antenna or an inverted-F antenna (Antenna 304 may be a monopole antenna in the form of stamped, PCB trace, or flat electrode type antenna or may be any other type of antenna; Paragraph 82-83 of Ahmed et al.).
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1 and 13 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
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.
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure
WO 2020167627 A1 (BOLIN THOMAS et al.) relates to a configuration of an antenna structure for a key fob that comprises control units and filters.
US 20140266508 A1 (Song; Young Kyu et al.) relates to a configuration of a bandpass filter comprising spiral arms that spiral into each other.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to GURBIR SINGH whose telephone number is (703)756-4637. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Thursday 8 a.m. - 5 p.m. ET.
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, Dameon E Levi can be reached at (571)272-2105. 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.
/DAMEON E LEVI/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2845
/GURBIR SINGH/Examiner, Art Unit 2845