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 Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claims 52-56 & 59-74 have been considered and are persuasive. Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, a new ground(s) of rejection is made in view of different interpretation of the previously applied reference(s) and newly found prior art reference(s).
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 52-56, 59, 68, 69 & 72-74 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Kim et al. US Patent Application Publication 2020/0194882.
Regarding Claim 52, Kim et al. teaches an antenna system (Figs. 1, 2, 5), comprising:
a base (101a Figs. 2, 5 Par. 0046);
a cover (101b Figs. 2, 5 Par. 0046), the cover configured to be removably coupled to the base (Fig. 2);
a ground reference portion (ground of 102 Figs. 2, 5 Par. 0124) coupled to the base and positioned between the base and the cover (Figs. 2, 5);
a first multi-band antenna (131 Figs. 2, 5 Par. 0105) directly coupled to and supported by the ground reference portion (Figs. 2, 5), the first multi-band antenna comprising a first low band radiation portion (implied from 3G/4G antennas Par. 0105) facing in a first direction (direction based on location of feed 131b Fig. 5); and
a second multi-band antenna (132 Figs. 2, 5 Par. 0105) directly coupled to and supported by the ground reference portion (Figs. 2, 5), the second multi-band antenna comprising a second low band radiation portion (implied from 3G/4G antennas Par. 0105) facing in a second direction, the second direction substantially opposite the first direction (opposite direction based on location of feed 132b Fig. 5).
Regarding Claim 53, Kim et al. teaches wherein the first multi-band antenna comprises a first feeding portion (131b Figs. 2, 5 Par. 0108), a first grounding portion (implied from Par. 0124, 0125), and a first high band radiation portion (implied from 3G/4G antennas Par. 0105), wherein the second multi-band antenna comprises a second feeding portion (132b Figs. 2, 5 Par. 0108), a second grounding portion (implied from Par. 0124, 0125), and a second high band radiation portion (implied from 3G/4G antennas Par. 0105).
Regarding Claim 54, Kim et al. teaches wherein the first high band radiation portion comprises two arms coupled to a base of the first low band radiation portion (Fig. 5).
Regarding Claim 55, Kim et al. teaches wherein the first high band radiation portion comprises a single arm coupled to a base of the first low band radiation portion (Fig. 5).
Regarding Claim 56, Kim et al. teaches wherein the first high band radiation portion comprises a plurality of arms coupled to a base of the first low band radiation portion (Fig. 5).
Regarding Claim 59, Kim et al. teaches wherein the first multi-band antenna comprises a first top low band radiation portion, the first top low band radiation portion being not-coplanar with the first low band radiation portion (Fig. 5).
Regarding Claim 73, Kim et al. teaches an antenna system (Figs. 1, 2, 5), comprising:
a base (101a Figs. 2, 5 Par. 0046);
a cover (101b Figs. 2, 5 Par. 0046), the cover configured to be removably coupled to the base (Fig. 2);
a ground reference portion (ground of 102 Figs. 2, 5 Par. 0124) coupled to the base and positioned between the base and the cover (Figs. 2, 5);
a first multi-band antenna (131 Figs. 2, 5 Par. 0105) coupled to the ground reference portion (Figs. 2, 5), the first multi- band antenna comprising a first low band radiation portion (implied from 3G/4G antennas Par. 0105) oriented to radiate in a first direction (orientation/direction based on location of feed 131b Fig. 5); and
a second multi-band antenna (132 Figs. 2, 5 Par. 0105) coupled to the ground reference portion (Figs. 2, 5), the second multi-band antenna comprising a second low band radiation portion (implied from 3G/4G antennas Par. 0105) oriented to radiate in a second direction, the second direction substantially opposite the first direction (orientation/direction based on location of feed 132b Fig. 5).
Regarding Claim 74, Kim et al. teaches an antenna system (Figs. 1, 2, 5), comprising:
a base (101a Figs. 2, 5 Par. 0046);
a cover (101b Figs. 2, 5 Par. 0046), the cover configured to be removably coupled to the base (Fig. 2);
a ground reference portion (ground of 102 Figs. 2, 5 Par. 0124) coupled to the base and positioned between the base and the cover (Figs. 2, 5);
a first multi-band antenna (131 Figs. 2, 5 Par. 0105) coupled to the ground reference portion (Figs. 2, 5), the first multi- band antenna comprising a first low band radiation portion (implied from 3G/4G antennas Par. 0105) comprising a first conductive portion formed on a first side of a first printed circuit board portion (conductive pattern 131a Figs. 2, 5 Par. 0105), the first side oriented to face in a first direction (orientation/direction based on location of feed 131b Fig. 5); and
a second multi-band antenna (132 Figs. 2, 5 Par. 0105) coupled to the ground reference portion (Figs. 2, 5), the second multi-band antenna comprising a second low band radiation portion (implied from 3G/4G antennas Par. 0105) comprising a second conductive portion formed on a second side of a second printed circuit board portion (conductive pattern 132a Figs. 2, 5 Par. 0105), the second side oriented to face in a second direction, the second direction substantially opposite the first direction (orientation/direction based on location of feed 132b Fig. 5).
Regarding Claim 68, Kim et al. teaches further comprising a third multi-band antenna (133 Figs. 2, 5 Par. 0103) and a fourth multi-band antenna (134 Figs. 2, 5 Par. 0103) coupled to the ground reference portion (Figs. 2, 5), the third multi-band antenna comprising a third low band radiation portion (Par. 0114) facing in the first direction (Figs. 2, 5) and the fourth multi-band antenna comprising a fourth low band radiation portion (Par. 0114) facing in the second direction (Figs. 2, 5).
Regarding Claim 69, Kim et al. teaches wherein the third multi-band antenna and the fourth multi-band antenna are substantially longitudinally aligned with the first multi-band antenna and the second multi-band antenna (Fig. 5).
Regarding Claim 72, Kim et al. teaches wherein the first low band radiation portion and the second low band radiation portion are configured for communication at frequencies less than approximately 1 GHz (implied from 3G/4G antennas Par. 0105).
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.
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 60-63, 70 & 71 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kim et al. US Patent Application Publication 2020/0194882 and Guntupalli et al. US Patent Application Publication 2023/0223709.
Regarding Claim 60, Kim et al. teaches the antenna system of claim 59 as shown in the rejection above.
Kim et al. is silent on wherein the first low band radiation portion is formed on a first lower substrate and the first top low band radiation portion is formed on a top substrate, the top substrate at least partially supported by the first lower substrate.
However, Guntupalli et al. teaches a first radiator 104 made from a PCB and supported by another PCB of the lower radiator 106 through PCB 108 Fig. 1 Par. 0067-0068.
In this particular case, forming antenna elements on a substrate such as a PCB and utilizing the lower one to support the top one is common and well known in the antenna art as evident by Guntupalli et al. due to being low weight, compact, cost efficient and easy to manufacture (Par. 0009).
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to form the first low band radiation portion of Kim et al. on a first lower substrate and the first top low band radiation portion on a top substrate, and at least partially supported by the first lower substrate based on the teachings of Guntupalli et al. as a result effect in order to reduce weight, size, cost as well as the being easy to manufacture.
Regarding Claim 61, Kim et al. as modified teaches the antenna system of claim 60 as shown in the rejection above.
Kim et al. is silent on wherein the first lower substrate comprises one or more top projections, the one or more top projections configured to extend through one or more corresponding slots in the top substrate.
However, Guntupalli et al. teaches wherein the first lower substrate comprises one or more top projections (120 Fig. 1 Par. 0062), the one or more top projections configured to extend through one or more corresponding slots in the top substrate (slots in 104 corresponding to ends 120).
In this particular case, providing one or more top projections to extend through one or more corresponding slots in the top substrate is common and well known in the art as evident by Guntupalli et al. in order to provide support without using additional parts (Par. 0062).
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to provide the antenna system of Kim et al. with one or more top projections to extend through one or more corresponding slots in the top substrate based on the teachings of Guntupalli et al. as a result effect in order to provide support without using additional parts.
Regarding Claim 62, Kim et al. as modified teaches the antenna system of claim 60 as shown in the rejection above.
Kim et al. is silent on wherein the second multi-band antenna comprises a second top low band radiation portion, wherein the second low band radiation portion is formed on a second lower substrate and the second top low band radiation portion is formed on the top substrate, the top substrate at least partially supported by the second lower substrate.
However, Guntupalli et al. teaches a first radiator 104 made from a PCB and supported by another PCB of the lower radiator 106 through PCB 108 Fig. 1 Par. 0067-0068.
In this particular case, forming antenna elements on a substrate such as a PCB and utilizing the lower one to support the top one is common and well known in the antenna art as evident by Guntupalli et al. due to being low weight, compact, cost efficient and easy to manufacture (Par. 0009).
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to form a second top low band radiation portion of the second multi-band antenna of Kim et al. on a second lower substrate and the second top low band radiation portion on a top substrate, and at least partially supported by the second lower substrate based on the teachings of Guntupalli et al. as a result effect in order to reduce weight, size, cost as well as the being easy to manufacture.
Regarding Claim 63, Kim et al. as modified teaches wherein the first top low band radiation portion and the second top low band radiation portion both face in a third direction, the third direction substantially perpendicular to the first direction and the second direction (vertical direction perpendicular to the horizontal first and second directions as modified above and seen in Figs. 2, 5 as modified with Guntupalli et al. Fig. 1).
Regarding Claim 70, Kim et al. as modified teaches the antenna system of claim 60 as shown in the rejection above.
Kim et al. is silent on wherein the first grounding portion is formed on a first grounding substrate comprising one or more side projections, the one or more side projections configured to extend through one or more corresponding plated slots in the first lower substrate.
However, Guntupalli et al. teaches “the first balun 108 includes slots or cut-outs (not shown) configured to accommodate at least a connecting portion extending from each of the planar structures 114A-D, allowing snap-fit coupling therebetween. Alternatively, the planar structures 114A-D may include slots or cut-outs and the first balun 108 may include a complementary connecting portion extending to enable snap-fit coupling therebetween” Par. 0071.
In this particular case, providing antenna elements such as the first grounding portion on a substrate such as a PCB with one or more side projections configured to extend through one or more corresponding plated slots in the first lower substrate is common and well known in the antenna art as evident by Guntupalli et al. due to the substrates being low weight, compact, cost efficient and easy to manufacture as well as to securely attach the substrates together without using additional parts (Par. 0009, 0062).
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to form the first grounding portion of Kim et al. on a first grounding substrate comprising one or more side projections, and configured to extend through one or more corresponding plated slots in the first lower substrate based on the teachings of Guntupalli et al. as a result effect due to the substrates being low weight, compact, cost efficient and easy to manufacture and in order to securely attach the substrates together without using additional parts.
Regarding Claim 71, Kim et al. as modified teaches wherein the one or more plated slots and the one or more side projections are configured to provide a mechanical connection between the first grounding substrate and the first lower substrate and an electrical connection between the first grounding portion and the first multi-band antenna (implicit as modified in claim 70 above for support and electrical connection through the PCB).
Claims 64, 66 & 67 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kim et al. US Patent Application Publication 2020/0194882 and Petropoulos US Patent Application Publication 2017/0317428.
Regarding Claim 64, Kim et al. teaches the antenna system of claim 73 as shown in the rejection above.
Kim et al. is silent on wherein the ground reference portion comprises a plurality of coaxial inputs coupled to a plurality of microstrip transmission lines embedded in the ground reference portion, wherein a first microstrip transmission line of the plurality of microstrip transmission lines extends to the first multi-band antenna and a second microstrip transmission line of the plurality of microstrip transmission lines extends to the second multi-band antenna.
However, Petropoulos teaches wherein the ground reference portion comprises a plurality of coaxial inputs (coaxial cables 108 Figs. 1-5 Par. 0049) coupled to a plurality of microstrip transmission lines (188 Figs. 1-5 Par. 0035, 0047) embedded in the ground reference portion, wherein a first microstrip transmission line of the plurality of microstrip transmission lines extends to the first multi-band antenna and a second microstrip transmission line of the plurality of microstrip transmission lines extends to the second multi-band antenna (Par. 0035, 0047-0050).
In this particular case, providing coaxial inputs and microstrip transmission lines are common and well known in the antenna art as evident by Petropoulos to provide a signal to and from the first and second multi-band antennas.
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to provide the ground reference portion of Kim et al. to comprise a plurality of coaxial inputs coupled to a plurality of microstrip transmission lines embedded in the ground reference portion, wherein a first microstrip transmission line of the plurality of microstrip transmission lines extends to the first multi-band antenna and a second microstrip transmission line of the plurality of microstrip transmission lines extends to the second multi-band antenna based on the teachings of Petropoulos as a result effect in order to provide a signal to and from the first and second multi-band antennas.
Regarding Claim 66, Kim et al. as modified teaches further comprising one or more multi-band WiFi antennas (133, 134 Figs. 2, 5 Par. 0113), wherein each of the one or more multi-band WiFi antennas are electrically coupled to at least one of the plurality of microstrip transmission lines (implied as modified in claim 64 above).
Regarding Claim 67, Kim et al. as modified teaches further comprising a GPS radiating devices electrically coupled to at least one of the plurality of microstrip transmission lines (135 GPS Fig. 5 Par. 0134).
Claim 65 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kim et al. US Patent Application Publication 2020/0194882 and Petropoulos US Patent Application Publication 2017/0317428 as applied to claim 64, and further in view of Ng et al. US Patent Application Publication 2016/0172750.
Regarding Claim 65, Kim et al. as modified teaches further comprising a plurality of coaxial connectors (Petropoulos 190 Figs. 5, 6 Par. 0049 as modified above).
Kim et al. as modified is silent on wherein the ground reference portion comprises one or more reliefs positioned near the plurality of coaxial inputs, the one or more reliefs configured such that a conduction of heat during a soldering process of the plurality of coaxial connectors is inhibited.
However, Ng et al. teaches wherein the ground reference portion comprises one or more reliefs positioned near the plurality of coaxial inputs (opening in 112 Fig. 9 Par. 0046, 0062), the one or more reliefs configured such that a conduction of heat during a soldering process of the plurality of coaxial connectors is inhibited (implicit by virtue of the same structure capable of performing the same function).
In this particular case, providing one or more reliefs such as a slit, slot or cutout is common and well known in the antenna art as evident by Ng et al. to reduce issues during soldering (Par. 0041, 0046).
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to provide the ground reference portion of Kim et al. as modified to comprise one or more reliefs positioned near the plurality of coaxial inputs based on the teachings of Ng et al. as a result effect in order to reduce issues during soldering such as conduction of heat during the soldering process.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MICHAEL M BOUIZZA whose telephone number is (571)272-6124. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday, 9am-5pm, EST.
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.
/MICHAEL M BOUIZZA/Examiner, Art Unit 2845
Prosecution Insights