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 .
DETAILED ACTION
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 03/23/2026 has been entered. Claims 1-8 and 10-12 are currently pending.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim 1 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.
Applicant argued that “Claims 1-2, 4-5 and 10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Shamblin et al., US-20120280871-A1 (hereinafter Shamblin) in view of Ying et al., US- 20030098812-Al (hereinafter Ying) applied as a teaching reference and further in view of Filatov, US-20200006850-A1; claims 3 and 6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Shamblin in view of Ying and Filatov as applied to claim 2 above, and further in view of Fukasawa et al., US-5966097-A (hereinafter Fukasawa); and claims 7 and 8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Shamblin in view of Ying and Filatov as applied to claim 2 above, and further in view of Asai, US-20050134510-A1. Applicant respectfully traverses the rejections.
However, in order to expedite prosecution, independent claim 1 is amended to clarify that the antenna includes a connecting part that connects the body part and the ground part, and that the connecting part and the ground part are secured by a screw.
The claimed subject matter, for example, achieves both mechanical fixation and electrical conductivity by securing the connecting part with a screw.
In Shamblin, the alleged connecting part (see page 8 of the Office Action) and the alleged ground part 13 are electrically connected, but no screw is disclosed.
Similarly, Ying, Fukasawa, and Asai fail to disclose any such screw.
Filatov fails to disclose a connecting part at all.
Accordingly, the applied references fail to disclose and would not have rendered obvious the combinations of features recited by independent claim 1. Therefore, independent claim 1 is patentable. The dependent claims are also patentable at least by virtue of their respective dependencies from a patentable independent claim, as well as for the additional features they recite.”
The arguments are moot because claim 1 is now being rejected Hirotoshi, JP-2002330022-A in view of Li et al, US-6188371-B1 as explained below.
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 1-2, 4-5 and 10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hirotoshi, JP-2002330022-A in view of Li et al, US-6188371-B1 (hereafter Li).
Regarding claim 1, Hirotoshi discloses the following:
an antenna device comprising:
a ground part (12, fig. 1);
an antenna including:
a body part (16) having an open end facing and open to the ground part, and
a feed part (20) extending from the body part in a direction of the ground part and having a feed point (although Hirotoshi is silent about a feed point, it is construed by one of ordinary skill in that art that the feed part 20 would have a feed point between the feed part 20 and the terminal 10a); and
a parasitic element (22, page 6, para 3) adjusting an impedance of the antenna (page 6, para 3), the parasitic element including a first end located at a distance from the open end (fig. 1), wherein
in a vertical direction of the ground part, a first distance of the first end from the ground part is the same as a second distance of the open end from the ground part (fig. 1),
the antenna includes a connecting part (18) that connects the body part and the ground part (fig. 1).
Hirotoshi does not disclose the connecting part and the ground part are secured by a screw.
Li suggests the connecting part (26, figs. 1, 8) and the ground part (12) are secured by a screw (40, fig. 8, col. 3, lines 54-57).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to secure the connecting part and the ground part taught in Hirotoshi by a screw as suggested in Li as claimed for the purpose of forming an electrical connection between the connecting part and the ground part and making the design more sturdy (Li, col. 3, lines 54-57).
Regarding claim 2, although Hirotoshi does not explicitly disclose wherein a length from the feed point to the open end through the antenna is a length corresponding to a first frequency band, one of ordinary skill in the antenna art would understand that any antenna would have a frequency band.
Regarding claim 4, Hirotoshi does not disclose wherein a distance between the body part and the ground part is shorter than a wavelength of the first frequency band.
Li suggests wherein a distance (the height, col. 3, lines 33-36) between the body part (18) and the ground part (12) is shorter than a wavelength of the first frequency band (col. 3, lines 33-36).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to adjust the distance between the body part and the ground part of the antenna device taught in Hirotoshi to be shorter than a wavelength of the first frequency band as suggested in Li as claimed, 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 need to reducing the size of the antenna while still maintaining the antenna’s performance (Li, col. 3, lines 39-45).
Regarding claim 5, Hirotoshi discloses wherein the parasitic element is disposed so as to increase an inductance component of an impedance of the first frequency band (Abstract, page 1).
Regarding claim 10, Hirotoshi discloses wherein the body part (16, fig. 1) and the parasitic element (22) are non-overlapping when viewed from the vertical direction of the ground part (12).
Claims 3 and 6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hirotoshi in view of Lin as applied to claim 2 above, and further in view of Fukasawa et al, US-5966097-A (hereinafter Fukasawa).
Regarding claim 3, the combination of Hirotoshi and Lin does not disclose wherein the length is approximately a quarter-wavelength of the first frequency band.
Fukasawa discloses wherein the length is approximately a quarter-wavelength of the first frequency band (col. 3, lines 7-10).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to adjust the length of the antenna taught in Hirotoshi and Lin to be approximately a quarter-wavelength as taught in Fukasawa as claimed 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 need to achieve a desired operating frequency depending on the requirements of the application.
Regarding claim 6, the combination of Hirotoshi and Lin does not disclose the antenna device according to claim 2, further comprising a capacitor connected to the antenna and increasing a capacitance component of an impedance of the first frequency band.
Fukasawa discloses the antenna device according to claim 2, further comprising a capacitor (6, fig. 8) connected to the antenna (2) and increasing a capacitance component of an impedance of the first frequency band (col. 6, lines 37-41).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide a capacitor as taught in Fukasawa to the antenna device taught in Hirotoshi and Lin as claimed for the purpose of matching the impedance between different components of the antenna device in order to reduce the signal loss in transmitting and maintain the antenna performance.
Claims 7-8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hirotoshi in view of Lin as applied to claim 2 above, and further in view of Asai, US-20050134510-A1.
Regarding claim 7, the combination of Hirotoshi and Lin does not disclose wherein the feed part has a larger width at a portion connected to the body part than at a portion corresponding to the feed point and corresponds to a second frequency band higher than the first frequency band.
Asai discloses wherein the feed part (23, fig. 1A) has a larger width at a portion connected to the body part (2) than at a portion (3) corresponding to the feed point (31, fig. 1B) and corresponds to a second frequency band (para [0054]).
Although Asai does not explicitly disclose the second frequency band is higher than the first frequency band, Asai discloses that the frequency of the feed part can be adjusted by changing the width of the feed part (para [0054]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to adjust the feeder part taught in Hirotoshi and Lin to have a larger width at a portion connected to the body part than a portion corresponding to the feed point as suggested in Asai as claimed for the purpose of achieving a desired operating frequency depending on the requirements of the application.
Regarding claim 8, Hirotoshi discloses wherein the antenna includes the connecting part (18, fig. 1).
The combination of Hirotoshi and Lin does not disclose wherein the antenna, by including the connecting part, also corresponds to a third frequency band different from both the first frequency band and the second frequency band.
Asai discloses wherein the antenna, by including the connecting part (24, fig. 1B), also corresponds to a third frequency band (para [0054]).
Although Asai does not explicitly disclose the third frequency band is different from both the first frequency band and the second frequency band, Asai discloses that the frequency of the connecting part can be adjusted by changing the width of the feed part (para [0054]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide a connecting part supporting a third frequency band as suggested in Asai to the antenna device taught in Hirotoshi and Lin as claimed for the purpose of designing an antenna being able to operate in multiple frequencies in order to reduce the size of the antenna.
Claim 11 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hirotoshi in view of Lin as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Yamada et al, US-20210167507-A1 (hereinafter Yamada).
Regarding claim 11, the combination of Hirotoshi and Lin does not disclose wherein the feed part has a shape forming an arc on a side facing the ground part.
Yamada suggests wherein the feed part (12, fig. 1) has a shape forming an arc on a side facing the ground part (10).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide the feed part taught in Hirotoshi and Lin to have a shape forming an arc as suggested in Yamada as claimed for the purpose of decreasing the voltage standing wave ratio and expanding the bandwidth in order to improve the antenna performance (Yamada, para [0070]).
Claim 12 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hirotoshi in view of Lin as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Russell et al, US-20190123443-A1 (hereinafter Russell).
Regarding claim 12, the combination of Hirotoshi and Lin does not disclose the antenna device according to claim 1, further comprising a holding member for holding the antenna, wherein the holding member has a locking part, a hole part is formed in the body part of the antenna, and the antenna is held by an engagement of the locking part and the hole part.
Russell suggests the antenna device according to claim 1, further comprising a holding member (112, fig. 1) for holding the antenna (104), wherein
the holding member has a locking part (119),
a hole part (120) is formed in the body part of the antenna (104), and the antenna is held by an engagement of the locking part and the hole part (para [0047]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide the locking part and the hold part as suggested in Russell to the antenna device taught in Hirotoshi and Lin as claimed for the purpose of holding the antenna in place without requiring mechanical fasteners or adhesive (Russell, para [0047]).
Citation of Pertinent Art
Korva, US-20040140935-A1 – antenna with parasitic element
Kawahata et al, US-6147650-A – antenna with parasitic element
Korva, US-20060170600-A1 – antenna with parasitic element
Khalifa et al, US-20160072178-A1, fig. 6 – the connecting part and the ground part are secured by a screw
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ANH N HO whose telephone number is (571)272-4657. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8:00-5:00.
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 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
/ANH HO/Examiner, Art Unit 2845
Prosecution Insights