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, see remarks, filed 11/21/2025, with respect to claim 13 have been fully considered and are persuasive. The objection of claim 13 has been withdrawn.
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1-12 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any combination of reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
Applicant’s arguments, see remarks, filed 11/21/2025, with respect to claims 14-17 and 22 have been fully considered and are persuasive. The rejection of claims 14-17 and 22 has been withdrawn.
The Remarks of 11/21/2025 regarding claim 19 have been fully considered but are not persuasive for the reasons below. The rejection of claim 19 under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as unpatentable over Irci in view of Yarga is maintained. On pages 14-17 of the remarks, applicant argues that 1) Irci does not disclose a positive antenna feed terminal, 2) Irci does not disclose that the antenna element 140 is formed from an integral protrusion of the conductive support plate since 140 is formed from “conductive metal traces on another printed circuit substrate overlapping upper slot 60U and/or conductive support plate 58, 3) Yarga does not disclose the integral protrusion of the conductive support plate”. Examiner respectfully disagrees, 1) While Irci does not disclose a positive antenna feed terminal, the positive antenna feed terminal is taught by Yarga, 2) Fig. 8 of Irci is merely illustrative of one embodiment (¶[0085]; If desired, antenna resonating element arm 130 may be formed on a substrate (e.g., formed from conductive metal traces on a printed circuit substrate) that at least partially overlaps upper slot 60U and/or conductive support plate 58. This is merely illustrative and, in general, antenna resonating element 130 may have other shapes and may be formed using other types of antenna resonating element structures) and also (while not formed by the same sheet) 140 is shown to couple to and attach to 58 at point 162 in fig. 9 thus making them integral through the via attachments. The rejection of claim 19 as unpatentable over Irci in view of Yarga is, therefore, maintained.
Applicant’s arguments, see remarks, filed 11/21/2025, with respect to claims 20-21 have been fully considered and are persuasive. The rejection of claims 20-21 has been withdrawn.
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, 6-8, 12 and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Irci in view of Yarga et al. (US10944153; hereinafter Yarga), further in view of Vazquez et al. (US9236659; hereinafter Vazquez).
Regarding claim 1, Irci discloses “An electronic device comprising: peripheral conductive housing structures (12W) having a dielectric-filled gap (18-1) that divides the peripheral conductive housing structures into a first segment (66) and a second segment (76) and having a second dielectric-filled gap (18-2) that separates the first segment from a third segment (68) of the peripheral conductive housing structures, wherein the first segment has a bend at a corner of the electronic device the third segment and the second dielectric-filled gap are at a first side of the bend, and the first dielectric- filled gap and the second segment are at a second side of the bend (see fig. 5); a display (64) mounted to the peripheral conductive housing structures; a dielectric cover layer (56) mounted to the peripheral conductive housing structures opposite the display; a conductive support plate (58) that extends along the dielectric cover layer opposite the display; a first slot (first slot in annotated fig. 8) that separates the conductive support plate from the first segment and the second segment; a second slot (second slot in annotated fig. 8) that extends into the conductive support plate from the first slot; and an antenna (130/140 and first/second slots form an antenna) configured to convey radio-frequency signals through the dielectric cover layer, and the antenna has a slot antenna resonating element that includes the first slot and the second slot (antenna uses the slots to radiate)”.
Irci does not disclose “wherein the antenna has a positive feed terminal coupled to an edge of the second slot” or “the conductive support plate has a segment that is laterally interposed between the second slot and a portion of the first segment at the first side of the bend”.
However, Yarga teaches “wherein the antenna (slot 82/86 and protrusion 68-1) has a positive feed terminal (56-1) coupled to an edge of the second slot (disposed on 68-1 that forms edge of second slot 86)”.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to apply the teachings of Yarga and make Irci’s electronic device wherein the antenna has a positive feed terminal coupled to an edge of the second slot, in order to create the desired current distribution on the plate.
Irci does not disclose “the conductive support plate has a segment that is laterally interposed between the second slot and a portion of the first segment at the first side of the bend”.
However, Yarga teaches “and the conductive support plate (104) has a segment (104E) that is laterally interposed between the second slot (slot containing L3) and a portion of the first segment (portion of 108 where C2 connects) at the first side of the bend”.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to apply the teachings of Vazquez and make Irci’s electronic device where the conductive support plate has a segment that is laterally interposed between the second slot and a portion of the first segment at the first side of the bend, in order to control the dimensions of the first and second slot.
Regarding claim 2, Irci discloses “The electronic device of claim 1, wherein the first slot extends along a first longitudinal axis (extends along X and Y axis) and the second slot extends along a second longitudinal axis (X-axis) that is non-parallel with respect to the first longitudinal axis”.
Regarding claim 3, Irci discloses “The electronic device of claim 2, wherein the second longitudinal axis is perpendicular to the first longitudinal axis (see fig. 8)”.
Regarding claim 4, Irci discloses “wherein the conductive support plate has a feed protrusion (140) that extends into the second slot”.
Irci does not disclose “the positive feed terminal being coupled to the feed protrusion”.
However, Yarga teaches “the positive feed terminal (56-1) being coupled to the feed protrusion (68-1)”.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to apply the teachings of Yarga and make Irci’s electronic device the positive feed terminal being coupled to the feed protrusion, in order to create the desired current distribution on the plate.
Regarding claim 6, Irci discloses “The electronic device of claim 4, wherein the feed protrusion (140) has a first portion (portion connecting to plate) extending from the edge of the conductive support plate and has a second portion (second portion of the L shape) extending perpendicularly from an end of the first portion”.
Regarding claim 7, Irci discloses the electronic device of claim 6 as shown previously.
Irci does not disclose “wherein the positive feed terminal is coupled to an end of the second portion”.
However, Yarga teaches that the location of the signal conductors (which make of the feeds) can have terminals at various locations on the antenna (col. 12 lines 63-68; If desired, signal conductor 52 may be coupled to multiple locations on antenna 40 (e.g., antenna 40 may include multiple positive antenna feed terminals coupled to signal conductor 52 of the same radio-frequency transmission line path 50)).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to apply the teachings of Yarga and make Irci’s electronic device wherein the positive feed terminal is coupled to an end of the second portion, in order to create the desired current distribution in the antenna.
Regarding claim 8, Irci discloses the electronic device of claim 7 as shown previously.
Irci does not disclose “wherein the feed protrusion has a third portion extending perpendicularly from an end of the second portion, the positive feed terminal being coupled to an end of the third portion”.
However, Yarga teaches “wherein the feed protrusion has a third portion (first portion is where 68-1 connects to plate, second portion is where 56-1 connects in fig. 5, so third portion is what extends upward from second portion in fig. 5) extending perpendicularly from an end of the second portion” and that the location of the signal conductors (which make of the feeds) can have terminals at various locations on the antenna (col. 12 lines 63-68; If desired, signal conductor 52 may be coupled to multiple locations on antenna 40 (e.g., antenna 40 may include multiple positive antenna feed terminals coupled to signal conductor 52 of the same radio-frequency transmission line path 50)).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to apply the teachings of Yarga and make Irci’s electronic device wherein the feed protrusion has a third portion extending perpendicularly from an end of the second portion, the positive feed terminal being coupled to an end of the third portion, in order to create the desired radiation pattern from the feed terminal and create the desired current distribution in the antenna.
Regarding claim 12, Irci discloses “The electronic device of claim 1, further comprising: a tuning component coupled to the first segment at the first dielectric-filled gap (¶[0080]; If desired, one or more antenna tuning components (e.g., components having fixed and/or adjustable inductors, capacitors, resistors, filters, and/or switches coupled together in any desired arrangement) may be coupled across extended portion 114 of upper slot 60U)”.
Regarding claim 19, Irci discloses “An electronic device comprising: peripheral conductive housing structures (12W); a display (64) mounted to the peripheral conductive housing structures; a rear housing wall (12R) mounted to the peripheral conductive housing structures opposite the display, the rear housing wall having a dielectric cover layer (56) and a conductive support plate (58) that extends along the dielectric cover layer; and an antenna (combination of 130/140 and first and second slots) having a slot antenna resonating element (second slot) configured to radiate through the dielectric cover layer, wherein the slot antenna resonating element includes a slot in the conductive support plate (second slot is in support plate), the conductive support plate has an integral protrusion (140) that extends into the slot (into second slot)”.
Irci does not disclose “the antenna is fed by a positive antenna feed terminal coupled to the integral protrusion of the conductive support plate”.
However, Yarga teaches “the antenna is fed by a positive antenna feed terminal (56-1) coupled to the integral protrusion (68-1) of the conductive support plate (94)”.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to apply the teachings of Yarga and make Irci’s electronic device wherein the antenna is fed by a positive antenna feed terminal coupled to the integral protrusion of the conductive support plate, in order to create the desired current distribution on the plate and protrusion.
Claim 5 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Irci in view of Yarga and Vasquez, further in view of Goto et al. (US20190372230; hereinafter Goto).
Regarding claim 5, Irci discloses the electronic device of claim 4 as shown previously.
Irci does not disclose “wherein the feed protrusion has a linear shape”.
However, Goto teaches “wherein the feed protrusion (13P) has a linear shape (see fig. 2)”.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to apply the teachings of Goto and make Irci’s electronic device wherein the feed protrusion has a linear shape, in order to produce the desired single radiation pattern with desired number of bands.
Claim 9 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Irci in view of Yarga and Vasquez, further in view of Amjadi et al. (US20240079757; hereinafter Amjadi).
Regarding claim 9, Irci discloses the electronic device of claim 1 as shown previously.
Irci does not disclose “further comprising: a conductive interconnect that couples the conductive support plate to the second segment, wherein the first slot laterally extends beyond the edge to the conductive interconnect”.
However, Amjadi teaches “further comprising: a conductive interconnect (80) that couples the conductive support plate (65) to the second segment (68), wherein the first slot laterally extends beyond the edge to the conductive interconnect (slot extends on both sides of interconnect)”.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to apply the teachings of Amjadi and make Irci’s electronic device further comprising: a conductive interconnect that couples the conductive support plate to the second segment, wherein the first slot laterally extends beyond the edge to the conductive interconnect, in order to create the desired current distribution on the plate and to couple directly with the frame.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 14-17, and 22 allowed.
Claim 14 now recites previously indicated allowable subject matter including “an opening in the conductive support plate” and “a slot in the conductive support plate and laterally interposed between the second segment of the radiating slot and the opening”. Claim 14 is now allowed.
Claims 15-17 and 22 depend from claim 14 and are allowed.
Claims 10-11 and 20-21 objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Claims 10-11 previously indicated allowable.
Claim 20 is allowable for reciting “being formed from a continuous piece of sheet metal”. As shown in claim 19, the support plate and antenna are integral but only through an attachment and not by being made of the same piece of metal.
Claim 21 allowable for reciting previously indicated allowable subject matter.
Claims 22 allowed for its dependence.
Any comments considered necessary by applicant must be submitted no later than the payment of the issue and, to avoid processing delays, should preferably accompany the issue fee. Such submissions should be clearly labeled "Comments on Statement of Reasons for Allowance".
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 AUSTIN MICHAEL BACK whose telephone number is (703)756-4521. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 8 AM - 5 PM 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, Dimary Lopez can be reached on (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.
/DAMEON E LEVI/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2845
/AUSTIN M BACK/Examiner, Art Unit 2845
Prosecution Insights