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 .
Response to Amendment
The amendment filed on 10/16/2025 has been entered. Claims 1-7 are currently pending. Applicant’s amendments have overcome the drawing objections and 35 USC 112 rejections previously set forth in the Non-Final Office Action mailed 04/17/2025.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claims 1, 3 and 7 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any combination of references applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
Applicant argued that “However, in order to expedite prosecution, independent claim 1 is amended to clarify that in a plan view, an outer edge portion of a long side of the first arm portion overlaps the end portion of the long side of the ground member.
In Grant, the outer edges on the long sides of the antenna elements 30 and 40 do not overlap, in a plan view, with the end portions on the long sides of the ground 20.
In Park, the outer edge on the long side of the AM/FM antenna 150 and the end portion of the base 110 do not overlap in a plan view.
Accordingly, the applied references fail to disclose and would not have rendered obvious the combinations of features recited by independent claim 1. The applied references similarly fail to disclose and would not have rendered obvious the combinations of features recited by independent claims 3 and 7.
Accordingly, the applied references fail to disclose and would not have rendered obvious the combinations of features recited by independent claims 1, 3, and 7. Therefore, independent claims 1, 3, and 7 are 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 claims 1, 3 and 7 are now being rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Grant et al, US-20060044196-A1 in view of Oshima et al, JP-2010081500-A as explained below.
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.
Claims 1-7 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.
Claim 1 recites the limitation "An antenna device attached to a ground member that is attached to a reinforcement member of a vehicle, the antenna device comprising:
a first substrate disposed at an end portion of a long side of the ground member, the long side serving as one direction of a front direction and a rear direction of a vehicle;
a first antenna element provided at the first substrate; and
a feed point located at one end of the first antenna element on the first substrate side, wherein
the first antenna element includes
a first upright portion formed to extend upright relative to the first substrate, the first upright portion having the feed point on the one end side" in lines 1-11 which renders the claim indefinite. It is not clear if “a vehicle” recited in lines 2 and 4 are the same or different. There is insufficient antecedent basis for the limitations “the first substrate side” and “the one end side” in the claim. For the purpose of examination, Examiner interprets the claim as best understood.
Similar rejections would be applied to claim 3 and 7.
Claims 2 and 4-6 inherit the indefiniteness of claims 1 and 3 and are subsequently rejected.
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 1-4 and 6-7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Grant et al, US-20060044196-A1 (hereinafter Grant) in view of Oshima et al, JP-2010081500-A (hereinafter Oshima).
Regarding claim 1, as best understood, Grant discloses the following:
an antenna device attached to a ground member (102, fig. 5B which can be used as a ground plane, see para [0053]) that is attached to a reinforcement member of a vehicle (fig. 5B), the antenna device (110, 111) comprising:
a first substrate (20, fig. 1, para [0031]) disposed at an end portion of a long side of the ground member (102), the long side serving as one direction of a front direction and a rear direction of a vehicle (fig. 5B below);
a first antenna element (30, fig. 1) provided at the first substrate (20), and
a feed point (38, fig. 2) located at one end of the first antenna element on the first substrate side (20), wherein
the first antenna element includes
a first upright portion (36) formed to extend upright relative to the first substrate (20),
the first upright portion (36) having the feed point (38) on the one end side, and
a first arm portion (39) extending from another end side of the first upright portion.
Grant does not disclose in a plan view, an outer edge portion of a long side of the first arm portion overlaps the end portion of the long side of the ground member.
Oshima discloses in a plan view, an outer edge portion of a long side (13a, fig. 6) of the first arm portion overlaps the end portion of the long side of the ground member (14, page 3, last para).
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 outer edge portion of a long side of the first arm portion of the antenna device taught in Grant to overlap the end portion of the long side of the ground member as suggested in Oshima as claimed, since it has been held that rearranging parts of an invention involves only routine skill in the art. In re Japikse, 86 USPQ 70 (CCPA 1950). The motivation stems from the need to increase the distance of the first arm portion to other antennas disposed on the ground plane in order to avoid interference to improve the antenna device’s performance.
PNG
media_image1.png
304
611
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 2, Grant discloses wherein the first arm portion (32, fig. 1) extends, from the first upright portion (36), along an edge of the first substrate (fig. 1 reproduced below), and the edge extends in a width direction of the vehicle (fig. 5B).
PNG
media_image2.png
292
448
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 3, as best understood, Grant discloses the following:
an antenna device (110, 111, fig. 5B) attached to a reinforcement member of a vehicle (fig. 5B), the antenna device comprising:
a ground member (102, fig. 5B which can be used as a ground plane, see para [0053]) attached to the reinforcement member (fig. 5B);
a first substrate (antenna housing 110, fig. 5B, para [0052] houses the antenna 10 in fig. 1 which comprise substrate 20) disposed at a first end portion of the ground member (102), the first end portion located in a first direction of a front direction and a rear direction of a vehicle (fig. 5B above);
a first antenna element (30, fig. 1) provided at the first substrate (20), and
a first feed point (38, fig. 2) located at one end of the first antenna element on the first substrate side (20),
a second substrate (antenna housing 111, fig. 5B, para [0054] houses the antenna 10 in fig. 1 which comprise substrate 20), the second end portion located in a second direction of the front direction and the rear direction of the vehicle, and the second direction being different from the first direction (fig. 5B);
a second antenna element (30, fig. 1) provided at the second substrate (20); and
a second feed point (38, fig. 2) located at one end of the second antenna element on the second substrate side (20), wherein
the first antenna element (30) includes
a first upright portion (36) formed to extend upright relative to the first substrate (20), the first upright portion (36) having the first feed point (38) on the one end side, and
a first arm portion (39) extending from another end side of the first upright portion,
the second antenna element includes
a second upright portion (36) formed to extend upright relative to the second substrate (20), the second upright portion (36) having the second feed point (38) on the one end side, and
a second arm portion (39) extending from another end side of the second upright portion.
Although Grant does not explicitly disclose the second substrate disposed at a second end portion of the ground member, Grant disclose the second substrate of the housing 111 can be located at any location along the ground member 102 (para [0055]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to arrange the second substrate of the antenna device taught in Grant at a second end portion of the ground member as claimed, since it has been held that rearranging parts of an invention involves only routine skill in the art. In re Japikse, 86 USPQ 70 (CCPA 1950). The motivation stems from the need to increase the distance between the first and second antenna elements disposed on the ground plane in order to avoid interference to improve the antenna device’s performance.
Grant does not disclose in a plan view, an outer edge portion of a long side of the first arm portion overlaps the first end portion of the ground member, and in a plan view, an outer edge portion of a long side of the second arm portion overlaps the second end portion of the ground member.
Oshima discloses in a plan view, an outer edge portion of a long side (13a, fig. 6) of the first arm portion overlaps the first end portion of the ground member (14, page 3, last para).
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 outer edge portion of a long side of the first arm portion of the antenna device taught in Grant to overlap the first end portion of the ground member as suggested in Oshima as claimed, since it has been held that rearranging parts of an invention involves only routine skill in the art. In re Japikse, 86 USPQ 70 (CCPA 1950). The motivation stems from the need to increase the distance of the first arm portion to other antennas disposed on the ground plane in order to avoid interference to improve the antenna device’s performance.
Although Oshima does not explicitly disclose an outer edge portion of a long side of the second arm portion overlaps the second end portion of the ground member, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to arrange the outer edge of the second arm portion taught in Grant to overlap the second end portion of the ground member as suggested in Oshima as claimed,, since it has been held that mere duplication of the essential working parts of a device involves only routine skill in the art. St. Regis Paper Co. v. Bemis Co., 193 USPQ 8 (CA7 1977). The motivation stems from the need to increase the distance of the second arm portion to other antennas disposed on the ground plane in order to avoid interference to improve the antenna device’s performance.
Regarding claim 4, Grant discloses wherein the second arm portion (32, fig. 1) extends, from the second upright portion (36), along an edge of the second substrate (fig. 1 above), and the edge extends in a width direction of the vehicle (fig. 5B).
Regarding claim 6, Grant discloses the antenna device according to claim 1, further comprising: a satellite communication antenna (60, para [0048]) configured to communicate with a satellite.
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.
Regarding claim 7, as best understood, Grant discloses the following:
an antenna device comprising:
a ground member (102, fig. 5B which can be used as a ground plane, see para [0053]) attached to a reinforcement member of a vehicle (fig. 5B), the ground member extending, from the reinforcement member, in a first direction of a front direction and a rear direction of the vehicle (fig. 5B);
a first substrate (20, fig. 1, para [0031]) disposed at an end portion of the ground member (102) in the first direction (fig. 5B);
a first antenna element (30, fig. 1) provided at the first substrate (20); and
a feed point (38, fig. 2) located at one end of the first antenna element (30) on the first substrate side (20), wherein
the first antenna element includes
a first upright portion (36) formed to extend upright relative to the first substrate (20), the first upright portion (36) having the feed point (38) on the one end side, and
a first arm portion (39) extending from another end side of the first upright portion.
Grant does not disclose in a plan view, an outer edge portion of a long side of the first arm portion overlaps an end portion of a long side of the first substrate.
Oshima discloses in a plan view, an outer edge portion of a long side (13a, fig. 6) of the first arm portion overlaps the end portion of the long side of the first substrate (14, page 3, last para).
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 outer edge portion of a long side of the first arm portion of the antenna device taught in Grant to overlap the end portion of the long side of the first substrate as suggested in Oshima as claimed, since it has been held that rearranging parts of an invention involves only routine skill in the art. In re Japikse, 86 USPQ 70 (CCPA 1950). The motivation stems from the need to increase the distance of the first arm portion to other antennas disposed on the first substrate in order to avoid interference to improve the antenna device’s performance.
Claim 5 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Grant and Oshima as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Park et al, US-20160218430-A1 (hereinafter Park).
Regarding claim 5, Grant discloses the antenna device according to claim 3, further comprising:
a first vehicle communication antenna (60 of housing 110, figs. 1, 5B) provided at the first substrate (20), and
a second vehicle communication antenna (60 of housing 111, figs. 1, 5B) provided at the second substrate (20), wherein
the first vehicle communication antenna has a higher gain in the first direction than the second direction (fig. 5B: antenna 60 of housing 110 is disposed opposite of direction 6A, it is implied that the gain of the antenna 60 of housing 110 would be higher in that direction than the direction 6A), and
the second vehicle communication antenna has a higher gain in the first direction (fig. 5B: antenna 60 of housing 111 is disposed toward direction 6A, it is implied that the gain of the antenna 60 of housing 111 would be higher in the direction 6A than the opposite direction).
Although Grant does not explicitly disclose the first and second vehicle communication antennas are configured to communicate with a vehicle different from the vehicle, Grant discloses the first and second vehicle communication antennas could be an antenna for various other applications, including, but not limited to: satellite radio, PCS, AMPS, TACS, NMT, IS-54/-136, IS-95, GSM, DSC18000, PDC, CDPD, RAM-Mobitex, Ardis-RD-LaP, Bluetooth, or IEEE 802.11 (para [0048]).
Park applied as a teaching reference discloses the roof-mounted antenna device 100 could comprise several V2X (Vehicle to Everything) antennas (160, 180, fig. 1, para [0064], [0067]) which is implied that the V2X antennas could communicate to other V2X antennas in other vehicles.
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 first and second communication antennas taught in Grant to be able to communicate with other vehicles as discloses in Park as claimed for the purpose of providing another way of communication between the vehicles besides the wireless communication between mobile electronic devices depending on the requirements of the application.
Examiner’s note - Regarding the recitation that an element is “configure to communicate with a vehicle” 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.
Citation of Pertinent Art
Rowell, US-9077087-B2 – an outer edge portion of a long side of the first arm portion overlaps the end portion of the long side of the ground member
Filatov, US-20200006850-A1 – an outer edge portion of a long side of the first arm portion overlaps the end portion of the long side of the ground member
Sawamura et al, US-20020093456-A1 – an outer edge portion of a long side of the first arm portion overlaps the end portion of the long side of the ground member
Numamoto et al, JP-2017011565-A – an outer edge portion of a long side of the first arm portion overlaps the end portion of the long side of the ground member
Kim et al, KR-20150072634-A – an outer edge portion of a long side of the first arm portion overlaps the end portion of the long side of the ground member
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.
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 N HO/Examiner, Art Unit 2845