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 .
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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 December 30th, 2025 has been entered.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed December 30th, 2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant argues that independent claim 1 and 11 are not disclosed by Haziza because the prior art does not teach that the transmission lines are not orthogonal within a specific plane. However, the claims, nor the specs, specifically describe the plane in which the lines are to be orthogonal in. Furthermore, figure 8+ of Haziza shows transmission lines with an orthogonal layout, in order to introduce phase delays.
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 and 11 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.
Claims 1 and 11 read “the first transmission line is arranged in a direction orthogonal to the plurality of second transmission lines with respect to the third layer”. However, this is unclear as to where exactly the plane lies with regard to said third layer.
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.
Claims 1-2, 6-8, and 10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Haziza (KR 20190042072 A), herein referred to as Haziza.
Regarding claim 1, Haziza discloses an antenna of a wireless communication system, the antenna comprising: a first transmission line (762) transmitting a radio frequency (RF) signal (page 7 of attached, lines 25-26); a first layer (750, 752) comprising a metal layer having a plurality of openings (753, only one shown in drawings, multiple mentioned in page 5, lines 18-27 of included translation) through which the RF signal passes (page 5, lines 25-27); a second layer (740, 705) comprising a plurality of dielectrics (744 and PET, line page, mentions multiple sections of VDC) changing a phase of the RF signal (page 4, lines 7-9); and a third layer (714) on which a plurality of first antenna elements (710) corresponding to the plurality of dielectrics are arranged (See fig. 9, 9a); and a plurality of second transmission lines (725) connected to the plurality of first antenna elements, respectively, in the third layer, wherein a first surface (bottom) of each of the plurality of dielectrics (744) is oriented toward the first layer (750, 752), wherein a second surface (top) opposite to the first surface of each of the plurality of dielectrics (744) is oriented toward the third layer (714), and wherein each of the plurality of first antenna elements (710) is arranged to correspond to at least one of the plurality of dielectrics (figs. 9-9a), wherein each of the plurality of dielectrics has a dielectric constant which is variable based on a voltage applied to the second transmission lines (as already noted, the reference teaches the dielectric constant is varied by application of a DC potential, and the transmission line necessarily carries a potential relative to ground during operation, and the claim language does not require the transmission line to be exclusively the bias electrode, only that the dielectric constant is variable based on a voltage applied to it), and wherein the first transmission line (762) is arranged in a direction orthogonal to the plurality of second transmission lines (725) with respect to a plane of the third layer (see fig. 7, and further see fig. 8, several portions of the transmission line/s are orthogonal to each other to introduce phase delay).
Regarding claim 2, Haziza anticipates all limitations of base claim 1.
Haziza also discloses wherein the plurality of first antenna elements (710) are arranged on a first surface (bottom) of the third layer (714), wherein the antenna further comprises a plurality of second antenna elements (712) arranged on a second surface (top) of the third layer (714), the second surface of the third layer is opposite to the first surface of the third layer (714), wherein the plurality of second antenna elements correspond to the plurality of first antenna elements (each section view corresponds to one element, such as seen in fig. 2).
Regarding claim 6, Haziza anticipates all limitations of base claim 1.
Haziza also discloses wherein the plurality of openings (753) correspond to the plurality of dielectrics (this is implied in page 5 of attached, lines 18-27, each feed has an opening), and wherein each of the plurality of openings (753) is disposed to be positioned in a first surface (bottom) of a corresponding dielectric among the plurality of dielectrics (744).
Regarding claim 7, Haziza anticipates all limitations of base claim 1.
Haziza also discloses wherein the plurality of openings (753) comprises at least one of an H-shaped structure, an L-shaped structure, or a rectangular structure (rectangular structure, see example in figs 8-8a).
Regarding claim 8, Haziza anticipates all limitations of base claim 1.
Haziza also discloses wherein the plurality of openings (753) are formed in the metal layer (755) included in the first layer (950, 752), and wherein the metal layer (755) is a ground (page 7, line 25).
Regarding claim 10, Haziza anticipates all limitations of base claim 1.
Haziza also discloses wherein the plurality of dielectrics have different dielectric constants (dielectric rates) (VDC: Variable dielectric constant).
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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claims 4, 9, 11-12, and 14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Haziza and further in view of Shailendra et al. (US 11462825 B2), herein referred to as Shailendra.
Regarding claim 4, Haziza anticipates all limitations of base claim 1.
Haziza also discloses wherein each of the plurality of second transmission lines (725) is connected to a first point (see fig. 9 example) of a corresponding antenna elements (710) among the plurality of first antenna elements, and wherein the first point includes an area corresponding to a center of the length of the antenna element with respect to the first direction (See fig. 9 for example).
Haziza does not disclose wherein the plurality of first antenna elements are arranged along a first direction in which the first transmission line is disposed.
However, Shailendra teaches an antenna wherein the plurality of antenna elements (42-45) are arranged along a first direction in which the first transmission line (21) is disposed (see fig. 3).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date to combine the teachings of the references and make the antenna of Haziza wherein the plurality of first antenna elements are arranged along a first direction in which the first transmission line is disposed, as taught by Shailendra, to control phase and directivity (col. 7, lines 30-41).
Regarding claim 9, Haziza anticipates all limitations of base claim 1.
Haziza does not specifically disclose wherein the first transmission line has a structure having a straight line shape.
However, Shailendra discloses wherein the first transmission line (21) has a structure having a straight line shape (see fig. 3).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date to combine the teachings of the references and make the antenna of Haziza wherein the first transmission line has a structure having a straight line shape, as taught by Shailendra to allow for control of the phase and directivity (col. 7, lines 30-41).
Regarding claim 11, Haziza discloses an electronic device (implementation) of a wireless communication system, the electronic device comprising: a first transmission line (762) transmitting a radio frequency (RF) signal (page 7 of attached, lines 25-26); a first layer (750, 752) including a metal layer having a plurality of openings (753, only one shown in drawings, multiple mentioned in page 5, lines 18-27 of included translation) through which the RF signal passes (page 5, lines 25-27); a second layer (740, 705) including a plurality of dielectrics (744 and PET, line page, mentions multiple sections of VDC) changing a phase of the RF signal (page 4, lines 7-9); and a third layer (714) on which a plurality of first antenna elements (710) corresponding to the plurality of dielectrics are arranged (See fig. 9, 9a, line page); and a plurality of second transmission lines (725) connected to the plurality of first antenna elements, in the third layer, respectively, wherein a first surface (bottom) of each of the plurality of dielectrics (744) is oriented toward the first layer (750, 752), wherein a second surface (top) opposite to the first surface of each of the plurality of dielectrics (744) is oriented toward the third layer (714), and wherein each of the plurality of first antenna elements (710) is arranged to correspond to at least one of the plurality of dielectrics (figs. 9-9a), and wherein each of the plurality of dielectrics has a dielectric constant which is variable based on a voltage applied to the second transmission lines (as already noted, the reference teaches the dielectric constant is varied by application of a DC potential, and the transmission line necessarily carries a potential relative to ground during operation, and the claim language does not require the transmission line to be exclusively the bias electrode, only that the dielectric constant is variable based on a voltage applied to it), and wherein the first transmission line (762) is arranged in a direction orthogonal to the plurality of second transmission lines (725) with respect to a plane of the third layer (see fig. 7, and further see fig. 8, several portions of the transmission line/s are orthogonal to each other to introduce phase delay).
Haziza does not disclose a plurality of array antennas comprising a first antenna array; a radio frequency integrated circuit (RFIC); and a board on which the plurality of array antennas and the RFIC are arranged, wherein the first antenna array comprises said limitations.
However, Shailendra discloses a plurality of array antennas (G11, G12, G13) comprising a first antenna array (G11); a radio frequency integrated circuit (FRIC) (90); and a board (2) on which the plurality of array antennas and the RFIC are arranged.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date to combine the teachings of the references and make the antenna of Haziza as a plurality of array antennas comprising a first antenna array; a radio frequency integrated circuit (RFIC); and a board on which the plurality of array antennas and the RFIC are arranged, wherein the first antenna array comprises the limitations of said antenna, as taught by Shailendra, to improve directivity (col. 1, lines 10-15).
Regarding claim 12, Haziza and Shailendra render obvious all limitations of base claim 11.
Haziza also discloses wherein the plurality of first antenna elements (710) are arranged on a first surface (bottom) of the third layer (714), wherein the antenna further comprises a plurality of second antenna elements (712) arranged on a second surface (top) of the third layer (714), the second surface of the third layer is opposite to the first surface of the third layer (714), wherein the plurality of second antenna elements correspond to the plurality of first antenna elements (each section view corresponds to one element, such as seen in fig. 2).
Regarding claim 14, Haziza and Shailendra render obvious all limitations of base claim 11.
Haziza also discloses wherein each of the plurality of second transmission lines (725) is connected to a first point (see fig. 9 example) of a corresponding antenna elements (710) among the plurality of first antenna elements, and wherein the first point includes an area corresponding to a center of the length of the antenna element with respect to the first direction (See fig. 9 for example).
Haziza does not disclose wherein the plurality of first antenna elements are arranged along a first direction in which the first transmission line is disposed.
However, Shailendra teaches an antenna wherein the plurality of antenna elements (42-45) are arranged along a first direction in which the first transmission line (21) is disposed (see fig. 3).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date to combine the teachings of the references and make electronic device of Haziza wherein the plurality of first antenna elements are arranged along a first direction in which the first transmission line is disposed, as taught by Shailendra, to control phase and directivity (col. 7, lines 30-41).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to BRANDON S WOODS whose telephone number is (571)270-1525. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8:30 am - 6:00 pm.
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, Dimary Lopez can be reached at 571-270-7893. 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.
/BRANDON SEAN WOODS/Examiner, Art Unit 2845
/DIMARY S LOPEZ CRUZ/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2845