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 amendments filed on May 19th 2026 have been entered. Claims 1-6 and 8-20 are currently pending. Applicants’ amendments to the drawings and claims have overcome the objections set forth in the Non-Final Office Action mailed on January 08th 2026.
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) 1-4, 11-14, 16, and 18-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Park et al. (US 20200185826 A1) in view of Kang et al. (US 10931000 B1) and Kim et al. (US 20190173176 A1).
Regarding Claim 1, Park et al. discloses an antenna module (Antenna module 900; Paragraph 113 and figure 9 of Park et al.) comprising:
a dielectric substrate that is flat (Printed Circuit Board 910 which is flat; Paragraph 113 and figure 9a of Park et al.);
a first radiating element disposed in or on the dielectric substrate (Patch antennas 941-944 on the substrate; Paragraph 115 and figure 9a of Park et al.);
a second radiating element disposed next to the first radiating element in a plan view seen from a direction normal to the dielectric substrate (Dipole Antenna elements 951 to 954 that are next to the patch antennas; Paragraph 116 and figure 9a of Sudo et al.); and
a first dielectric layer disposed to cover the second radiating element wherein the second radiating element is a linear antenna (Antenna elements 951 to 954 can be dipole antennas that are covered by a molding layer 971 that serves a first dielectric layer and can be configured to cover at least a part or all of the antenna elements 951 to 954; Paragraph 116) ,
a dielectric constant of the first dielectric layer is higher than a dielectric constant of the dielectric substrate (Antenna Module 900 contains a group of dipole antennas on a separate layer of the PCB that can be dielectric enclosed in a molding layer 971 which has a higher dielectric constant than the rest of the layers of the PCB 910 holding the rest of the structure; Paragraph 89, 117 and Table 9 and figure 9A of Park et al.), and a thickness of the first dielectric layer is smaller than a thickness of the dielectric substrate (Molding layer 971 only covers the dipole antennas and would be smaller in thickness than the rest of the substrate 910; Paragraph 120 and figure 9C of Park et al.), and
wherein a first direction is a direction from the at least one first radiating element to the at least one second radiating element,
a second direction is a direction from the at least one second radiating element to the at least one first radiating element (A first direction would be from the patch 941-944 to any of the dipoles and 951-954 a second direction from said dipoles to the patch antenna; Figure 9a of Park et al.).
Park et al. fails to explicitly disclose the first dielectric layer not covering the first radiating elements, a first distance from the second radiating element to a first edge of the first dielectric layer in the first direction is longer than a second distance from the second radiating element to a second edge of the first dielectric layer in the second direction, and the first dielectric layer being stacked and arranged on the dielectric substrate.
However, Kang et al. does disclose the first dielectric layer not covering the first radiating elements (Substrate 410 may comprise antenna units 201a disposed upon it and second antenna unit 100a wherein 100a comprise antenna patterns 11a covered by a dielectric layer 130a wherein dielectric layer 130 has a dielectric constant higher than the substrate 410 and only covers the first units of 100a and not units of 201a; Paragraph 35-67 and 111 as well as figure 3F of Kang et al.) and the first dielectric layer being stacked and arranged on the dielectric substrate (Dielectric layer 130 is stacked and arranged on the substrate 410 through solder layer 125b which serves as a bonding agent to allow antenna units 100a to be placed on the substrate 410; Paragraph 35-67 and 111 as well as figure 3F of Kang et al. ).
Kim et al. also discloses a first distance from the second radiating element to a first edge of the first dielectric layer in the first direction is longer than a second distance from the second radiating element to a second edge of the first dielectric layer in the second direction, and the first dielectric layer being stacked and arranged on the dielectric substrate (Antenna module 1000-2 comprises a substrate 1140b wherein first radiating element 1110b is disposed with the substrate an adjacent upper pattern 1115, now labeled 1115a-1, may serve as a second antenna disposed under a dielectric cover in the form of encapsulation member 110a wherein 110a is stacked and arranged on substrate 1140b and second antenna 1115a-1 is closer to the second edge than the first edge: Paragraph 161-195 and figure 12A-B ).
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 Park et al. to have the first dielectric layer not covering the first radiating elements as taught by Kang et al. to reduce the size of antennas employed (Paragraph 66-69 of Kang 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 by Park et al. and Kang et al. to have a first distance from the second radiating element to a first edge of the first dielectric layer in the first direction is longer than a second distance from the second radiating element to a second edge of the first dielectric layer in the second direction 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) and to have the first dielectric layer being stacked and arranged on the dielectric substrate as taught by Kim et al. The motivations stems from wanting as to provide enhanced durability for the second antenna structure (Paragraph 167 of Kim et al.) and since the location of the radiating element would affect its radiation characteristics and pattern.
PNG
media_image1.png
523
540
media_image1.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image2.png
354
799
media_image2.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image3.png
302
322
media_image3.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image4.png
415
752
media_image4.png
Greyscale
Regarding Claim 2, Park et al. further discloses the first radiating element is a planar antenna (Patch antennas 941-944 on the substrate; Paragraph 115 and figure 9a of Park et al.).
Regarding Claim 3, Park et al. further discloses
a ground electrode (Antenna module 900 can include a communication circuit 920 that can serve as a ground; Paragraph 50 and figure 9c of Park et al.),
wherein the first radiating element is a patch antenna (First radiating element is Patch antennas 941-944 on the substrate; Paragraph 115 and figure 9a of Park et al.),
the second radiating element is a dipole antenna (Dipole Antenna elements 951 to 954 that are next to the patch antennas; Paragraph 116 and figure 9a of Sudo et al.),
the dielectric substrate has a first surface that faces a second surface (Dielectric Substrate has a first surface labeled 910-1 and second surface labeled 910-2 wherein the first faces the second; Annotated figure 2b of Sudo et al.), and
the ground electrode is disposed on the second surface of the dielectric substrate or in between the first radiating element and the second surface in the dielectric substrate (Ground 920 is placed on the second surface of the dielectric substrate; figure 9c of Park et al.).
Regarding Claim 4, Park et al. does disclose in the plane view, the ground electrode is disposed in an area that does not overlap the second radiating element (Ground 920 is placed under the first radiating elements 941 to 954 but not the second radiating elements 951 to 954; figure 9c of Park et al.).
Regarding Claim 11, Park et al. further discloses a second dielectric layer disposed in an area where the first dielectric layer is not present in the plan view wherein a dielectric constant of the second dielectric layer is lower than the dielectric constant of the first dielectric layer, (Antenna Module 900 contains a group of dipole antennas on a separate layer of the PCB that can be dielectric enclosed in a molding layer 971 which has a higher dielectric constant than the rest of the layers of the PCB including a second dielectric layer of the PCB that is placed at the top; Paragraph 89, 117 and Table 9 and figure 9A of Park et al.), and in a direction normal to a plane of the dielectric substrate, a location of a surface of the first dielectric layer is same as a location of a surface of the second dielectric layer (When looking at PCB from the top, which would be normal from the dielectric substrate at in the x plane, both first and second layers would have the same location for surfaces since they are stacked; Figure 9a and 9c of Park et al.).
Regarding Claim 12, Park et al. further discloses a feed circuit that supplies a radio frequency signal to each radiating element (Communication circuit 920 includes feeding nodes that feed the antenna structure; Paragraph 50 and figure 9c of Park et al.).
Regarding Claim 13, Park et al. further discloses a communication device equipped with the antenna module (Antenna module 200 with patch and dipole antennas may include a communication circuit 220; Paragraph 50 and figure 3a of Park et al.).
Regarding Claim 14, Park et al. further discloses the first radiating element is a patch antenna, and the dielectric substrate has a ground electrode facing the first radiating element, the thickness of the first dielectric layer is smaller than a distance between the first radiating element and the ground electrode (Ground 920 faces the Patch antenna 941-944 and a thickness of the molding layer would be smaller than the thickness of the distance between the ground, which is outside the substrate, and the patch antenna; Paragraph 53 and Figure 9c of Park et al.).
Regarding Claim 16, Park et al. discloses the first radiating element is a patch antenna, and the dielectric substrate includes a ground electrode facing the first radiating element (Patch antenna 941-944 has a ground 920 that faces the patch antenna; Paragraph 115 and figure 9c of Park et al.), in a normal direction to a plane of the dielectric substrate, the second radiating element is positioned between the first radiating element and the ground electrode (Dipole antennas 51 are located between the patch antennas 941 and the communication circuit 920 serving as a ground; Paragraph 50 and figure 9c of Park et al.).
Regarding Claim 18, Park et al. further disclose the feed circuit upconverts a baseband signal to generate the radio frequency signal (Communication Circuit 220 which is serves as the feed may convert a baseband signal into a higher frequency signal; Paragraph 59 of Park et al.).
Regarding Claim 19, Park et al. further disclose a baseband circuit to generate the baseband signal (Baseband signal is supplied by a circuit between processor 141 and communication circuit 220; Paragraph 59 of Park et al.).
Claim(s) 5-6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Park et al. (US 20200185826 A1) in view of Kang et al. (US 10931000 B1), Kim et al. (US 20190173176 A1), and Sudo et al. (US 10153557 B2).
Regarding Claim 5, Park et al., Kang et al., and Kim et al. fail to disclose the first radiating element and the second radiating element are configured to emit radio waves of a same wavelength, and a distance between the first radiating element and the second radiating element is longer than 1/2 of the wavelength.
Although Sudo et al. fails to explicitly disclose a distance between the first radiating element and the second radiating element is longer than 1/2 of the wavelength, Sudo et al. does disclose the first radiating element and the second radiating element are configured to emit radio waves of a same wavelength (The Patch antenna 50 can be phase-synthesized dipole elements 21 such that they operate at the same frequency; Paragraph 25 of Sudo 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 Park et al., Kang et al., and Kim et al. to have the first radiating element and the second radiating element be configured to emit radio waves of a same wavelength as taught by Sudo et al. and to have a distance between the first radiating element and the second radiating element be longer than 1/2 of the wavelength 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 wanting waves tp be phase-synthesized and directivity changed in a wider range (Paragraph 25 of Sudo et al.) and to control/restrict the coupling between antenna units by changing the distance between them (Paragraph 5 of Sudo et al.).
Regarding Claim 6, Park et al. further disclose the first radiating element and the second radiating element are configured to emit a radio wave of a first wavelength and a radio wave of a second wavelength, respectively when the first wavelength and second wavelength have different lengths (Antenna array of patches 540 can emit radio waves in a first frequency/wavelength and a second antenna array of dipoles 550 can emit radio waves in a second frequency/wavelength wherein frequencies and thus wavelengths can be different; Paragraph 98 of Park et al.).
Park et al. fails to explicitly disclose the second radiating element is longer than 1/2 of a longer one of the first wavelength and the second wavelength.
However, 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 by Park et al. to have a distance between the first radiating element and the second radiating element is longer than 1/2 of a longer one of the first wavelength and the second wavelength 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 wanting to control/restrict the coupling between antenna units (Paragraph 5 of Sudo et al.).
Claim(s) 8-9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sudo et al. (US 10153557 B2) in view of Park et al. (US 20200185826 A1), Kang et al. (US 10931000 B1), and Kim et al. (US 20190173176 A1).
Regarding Claim 8, Sudo et al. discloses an antenna module (Antenna module of the second embodiment; Paragraph 21 and figure 2A of Sudo et al.) comprising:
a dielectric substrate that is flat (Dielectric Substrate 10 which is flat; figure 1b of Sudo et al.);
a first antenna group disposed in or on the dielectric substrate, the first antenna group including at least one first radiating element (Plurality of Patch antennas 50 on the substrate; Paragraph 21 and figure 2a of Sudo et al.);
a second antenna group disposed next to the first antenna group in a plan view seen from a direction normal to the dielectric substrate, the second antenna group including at least one second radiating element (First antenna array 21 made up of dipole antennas next to the patch antennas; Paragraph 5-6 and figure 2a of Sudo et al.); and
a first dielectric layer disposed to cover the second antenna group, wherein the at least one second radiating element is a linear antenna (Antenna array 21 made up of dipole antennas Is disposed inside layer 12 of the substrate wherein layer 15; Paragraph 5-6,16 and figure 1b of Sudo et al.),
wherein a first direction is a direction from the at least one first radiating element to the at least one second radiating element,
a second direction is a direction from the at least one second radiating element to the at least one first radiating element(A first direction would be from the patch antennas 50 to any of the dipoles array 21 to a second direction from said dipoles to the patch antenna; Figure 9a of Sudo et al.).
Sudo et al. fails to disclose a dielectric constant of the first dielectric layer is higher than a dielectric constant of the dielectric substrate, a thickness of the first dielectric layer is smaller than a thickness of the dielectric substrate, the first dielectric layer not covering the first antenna group, and a first distance from the at least one second radiating element to an edge of the first dielectric layer in the first direction is longer than a second distance from the at least one second radiating element to an edge of the first dielectric layer in the second direction, and , the first dielectric layer being stacked and arranged on the dielectric substrate.
However, Park et al. does disclose a dielectric constant of the first dielectric layer is higher than a dielectric constant of the dielectric substrate ((Antenna Module 900 contains a group of dipole antennas on a separate layer of the PCB that can be dielectric enclosed in a molding layer 971 which has a higher dielectric constant than the rest of the layers of the PCB 910 holding the rest of the structure; Paragraph 89, 117 and Table 9 and figure 9A of Park et al.),) , and a thickness of the first dielectric layer is smaller than a thickness of the dielectric substrate (Molding layer 971 only covers the dipole antennas and would be smaller in thickness than the rest of the substrate; Paragraph 120 and figure 9C of Park et al.).
Kang et al. also discloses the first dielectric layer not covering first antenna group (Substrate 410 may comprise antenna units 201a disposed upon it and second antenna unit 100a wherein 100a comprise antenna patterns 11a covered by a dielectric layer 130a wherein dielectric layer 130 has a dielectric constant higher than the substrate 410 and only covers the first units of 100a and not units of 201a; Paragraph 35-67 and 111 as well as figure 3F of Kang et al.) and the first dielectric layer being stacked and arranged on the dielectric substrate (Dielectric layer 130 is stacked and arranged on the substrate 410 through solder layer 125b which serves as a bonding agent to allow antenna units 100a to be placed on the substrate 410; Paragraph 35-67 and 111 as well as figure 3F of Kang et al. ).
Kim et al. also discloses a first distance from the at least one second radiating element to a first edge of the first dielectric layer in the first direction is longer than a second distance from the at least one second radiating element to a second edge of the first dielectric layer in the second direction and the first dielectric layer being stacked and arranged on the dielectric substrate (Antenna module 1000-2 comprises a substrate 1140b wherein first radiating element 1110b is disposed with the substrate an adjacent upper pattern 1115, now labeled 1115a-1, may serve as a second antenna disposed under a dielectric cover in the form of encapsulation member 110a wherein 110a is stacked and arranged on substrate 1140b and second antenna 1115a-1 is closer to the second edge than the first edge wherein there are multiple modules 1000-2 with a plurality of second antennas 1115a arranged as such: Paragraph 161-195 and figure 12A-B ).
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 Sudo et al. to have a dielectric constant of the first dielectric layer be higher than a dielectric constant of the dielectric substrate, and a thickness of the first dielectric layer is smaller than a thickness of the dielectric substrate such that it can cover the second antenna as taught by Park et al. to improve the performance of the antenna (Paragraph 89 of Park 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 by Sudo et al. and Park et al. to have the first dielectric layer not covering the first antenna group as taught by Kang et al. to reduce the size of antennas employed (Paragraph 66-69 of Kang et al.). It would have been even 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 by Sudo et al., Park et al., and Kang et al. to have a first edge of the first dielectric layer in the first direction is longer than a second distance from the second radiating element to a second edge of the first dielectric layer in the second direction 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) and to have the first dielectric layer being stacked and arranged on the dielectric substrate as taught by Kim et al.. The motivations stems from wanting as to provide enhanced durability for the second antenna structure (Paragraph 167 of Kim et al.) and since the location of the radiating element would affect its radiation characteristics and pattern.
PNG
media_image5.png
443
451
media_image5.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image6.png
235
510
media_image6.png
Greyscale
Regarding Claim 9, Sudo et al. further discloses
a third antenna group disposed next to the first antenna group in the plan view (A third group of dipole antennas 23 disposed next to the first patch antennas 50; Paragraph 4-8 and figure 2a of Sudo et al.),
the third antenna group including at least one third radiating element, wherein the at least one third radiating element is a linear antenna (Antenna array 23 includes dipole antennas; Paragraph 4-8 and figure 2a of Sudo et al.),
the at least one third radiating element is configured to emit a radio wave in a direction different from a direction in which the at least one second radiating element emits a radio wave (Array 23 radiates in a direction the dipoles are facing which is at 270 degrees verses the array 21 which radiates in direction its dipoles face at 90 degrees; Paragraph 8 and figure 2a of Sudo et al.),
and the first dielectric layer is disposed to further cover the third antenna group (Array 23 and 21 are covered in the same dielectric layer; Paragraph 13 of Sudo et al.).
Claim(s) 10 and 17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sudo et al. (US 10153557 B2) in view of Park et al. (US 20200185826 A1), Kang et al. (US 10931000 B1), Kim et al. (US 20190173176 A1), and Hwang et al. (US 20190304901A1).
Regarding Claim 10, Sudo et al. further discloses
a fourth antenna group disposed next to the first antenna group in the plan view, the fourth antenna group including at least one fourth radiating element (Array 22 serves as a fourth group with at least one dipole antenna; Paragraph 4-8 and figure 2a of Sudo et al.);
and a fifth antenna group 129 disposed next to the first antenna group in the plan view, the fifth antenna group including at least one fifth radiating element, wherein (Array 24 serves as a fifth group with at least one dipole antenna; Paragraph 4-8 and figure 2a of Sudo et al.);
the at least one fourth radiating element and the at least one fifth radiating element are linear antennas (Both 24 and 22 include at least one dipole antenna; Paragraph 4-8 and figure 2a of Sudo et al.),
the at least one fourth radiating element is configured to emit a radio wave in a first direction different from directions in which the at least one second radiating element and the at least one third radiating element emit radio waves (Array 22 radiates in the directions its dipoles are facing which is at 180 degrees; Paragraph 8 and figure 2a of Sudo et al.),
the at least one fifth radiating element is configured to emit a radio wave in a second direction different from directions in which the at least one second radiating element, the at least one third radiating element, and the at least one fourth radiating element emit radio waves (Array 24 radiates in the direction its dipoles are facing which is at 0 degrees; Paragraph 8 and figure 2a of Sudo et al.).
Sudo et al., Park et al., Kang et al., and Kim et al. fail to disclose the first dielectric layer is disposed to further cover the fourth antenna group and the fifth antenna group,
However, Hwang et al. discloses the first dielectric layer is disposed to further cover the fourth antenna group and the fifth antenna group (Patch antenna structures ANT1 are surrounded by groups of dipole antennas ANT2 which includes a 4th and 5th group that share the same dielectric layer 140; Paragraph 57 and figure 2-3 of Hwang).
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 Sudo et al., Park et al., Kang et al., and Kim et al. to have the first dielectric layer disposed to further cover the fourth antenna group and the fifth antenna group as taught by Hwang et al. so dipole antennas can share the same dielectric properties and less energy dissipates due to low loss tangent (Paragraph 36-37 of Hwang et al.).
PNG
media_image7.png
398
367
media_image7.png
Greyscale
Regarding Claim 17, Sudo et al. further discloses in the plan view, the first antenna group is disposed in between the second antenna group and the third antenna group in a third direction and in between the fourth antenna group and the fifth antenna group in a fourth direction, the fourth direction being orthogonal to the third direction (Antenna array 50 is between the second and third group of antennas 21 and 23 and fourth and fifth antenna arrays 22 and 24 where the arrays are orthogonal to each other; Figure 2A of Sudo et al.).
Claim 15 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Park et al. (US 20200185826 A1) in view of Kang et al. (US 10931000 B1), Kim et al. (US 20190173176 A1), and Jeong et al. (US 20190267713 A1).
Regarding Claim 15, Park et al., Kang et al., and Kim et al. fails to disclose in wherein in a thickness direction of the dielectric substrate, the first dielectric layer is placed further outside the dielectric substrate than the first radiating element.
However, Jeong et al. does disclose wherein in a thickness direction of the dielectric substrate, the first dielectric layer is placed further outside the dielectric substrate than the first radiating element (Dipole radiators may be placed in a 5th layer of the substrate while the patch radiators are at the 8th layer; Paragraph 29 and figure 4 of Jeong 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 Park et al., Kang et al., and Kim et al. to have in a thickness direction of the dielectric substrate, the first dielectric layer be placed further outside the dielectric substrate than the first radiating element as taught by Jeong et al. so they have induce no currents in each other and thus have low interference (Paragraph 40 of Jeong et al.).
Claim 20 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Park et al. (US 20200185826 A1) in view of Kang et al. (US 10931000 B1), Kim et al. (US 20190173176 A1), and Sanderovich et al. (US 10340607 B2).
Regarding Claim 20, Park et al., Kang et al., and Kim et al., fail to disclose a plurality of switches to switch the feed circuit and baseband circuit from transmit to receive mode.
However, Sanderovich et al. discloses a plurality of switches to switch the feed circuit and baseband circuit from transmit to receive mode (The RF circuit 980 and processor, with broadband circuit, 970 have their paths controlled by switches such that the antenna components work one way to allow transmitting and another way to allow receiving; Paragraph 62-68 and figure 9 of Sanderovich 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 Sudo et al., Kang et al., and Kim et al, to have a plurality of switches to switch the feed circuit and baseband circuit from transmit to receive mode so that incoming signals can be combined for receiving or distributed for transmitting (Paragraph 62-63 of Sanderovich et al.).
Additional Comments Regarding the Claim Rejections
Examiner’s note – Regarding claims 5-6, and 9-10, 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.).
Response to Arguments
“However, Kang does not disclose that the dielectric layer 130 (or 103a), which is asserted to correspond to the claimed first dielectric layer, is disposed and arranged on a dielectric substrate. As illustrated in the figures of Kang, the dielectric layer 130 (130a) is disposed and arranged on a solder layer 125.
Moreover, the feature of the first dielectric element covering the second radiating element but not the first radiating element is not described in Kang (or Park for that matter). The Office Action asserts that this feature is found in the combination of Park and Kang, but this is not the selective covering described in the application (for example, paragraph [0031]) and defined in the claims. Rather, the combination of Park and Kang merely describe a general patch structure and that the layers can be different. This is insufficient to establish a prim a facie case of obviousness against amended Claim 1.
Moreover, the features recited in amended Claim 1 defines the relationship between the first and second distances, specifically between the first radiating element and the end of the dielectric covering the first radiating element. In contrast, Murata describes a comparison between the radiation element 121 and the edge of the dielectric on which the radiation element is disposed. This is a different arrangement of the dielectric and the radiating element making the comparison between Murata and the instant claim language inappropriate.”
Applicant's arguments filed on May 19th 2026 in regards to claims have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. The dielectric layer 130a is arranged and stacked on the substrate 410 since the solder layer just serves as a bonding agent to hold the dielectric in place. The term “stacked and arranged” is broad and just requires the layer to be on the substrate and does not preclude an intervening bonding agent. The applicants is interpreting the language to mean “directly stacked and arranged on the substrate with no intervening layers” which is not being recited in the claims. However, examiner also notes that new secondary reference Kim et al. also teaches the claimed subject matter of having a dielectric layer stacked and arranged on a substrate. Kim also teaches the dielectric layer covering a second radiating element with said element being in a certain position.
Applicant’s other arguments with respect to claim(s) 1 and 8 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 2020139045 A1 (KIM, YEONWOO et al.) relates to a configuration of a patch antenna structure with dipoles along its edges.
EP 3490058 A1 (YUN SU MIN et al.) relates to a configuration of a patch antenna structure with dipoles along its edges.
JP 4568355 B2 (福井 伸治 et al.) relates to a configuration of a patch antenna with dipoles and a cover for the dipoles that has a different dielectric coefficient.
US-11342663-B2 (Kim; Nam Ki) relates to a configuration of a patch antenna with dipoles with dipoles along its side.
US 11431107 B2 (Park; Ju Hyoung et al.) discloses a first and second antenna covered by dielectric layers wherein the a layer covering one antenna has a dielectric constant than a layer covering another antenna.
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
Prosecution Insights