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 .
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election without traverse of invention I in the reply filed on 07/14/2025 is acknowledged.
Double Patenting
The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory double patenting rejection is appropriate where the conflicting claims are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969).
A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on nonstatutory double patenting provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with the examined application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. See MPEP § 717.02 for applications subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA as explained in MPEP § 2159. See MPEP § 2146 et seq. for applications not subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b).
The filing of a terminal disclaimer by itself is not a complete reply to a nonstatutory double patenting (NSDP) rejection. A complete reply requires that the terminal disclaimer be accompanied by a reply requesting reconsideration of the prior Office action. Even where the NSDP rejection is provisional the reply must be complete. See MPEP § 804, subsection I.B.1. For a reply to a non-final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.111(a). For a reply to final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.113(c). A request for reconsideration while not provided for in 37 CFR 1.113(c) may be filed after final for consideration. See MPEP §§ 706.07(e) and 714.13.
The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The actual filing date of the application in which the form is filed determines what form (e.g., PTO/SB/25, PTO/SB/26, PTO/AIA /25, or PTO/AIA /26) should be used. A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/applying-online/eterminal-disclaimer.
Claims 11-30 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1, 6, 9-11 of U.S. Patent No. 11,139,588. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other as shown below:
Current Claims
U.S. Patent No. 11,139,588
Claim 11
Claim 1
U.S. Patent No. 11,139,588 does not explicitly claim the display or the sidewalls of the housing in these claims. However, it is well-known in the antenna art that the housing of electronic devices have sidewalls and displays, and it would have been obvious to include sidewalls and a display mounted to the sidewalls in order to allow a user to interact with the electronic device.
Claim 12
Claim 1
U.S. Patent No. 11,139,588 does not explicitly claim that the patch is directly fed, however it is known that patch antennas are either directly or indirectly fed. It would have been obvious to have the patch be directly fed as this is one of a finite number of ways to feed a patch antenna which can allow for a direct power transfer without losses from indirectly feeding.
Claim 13
Claim 10
Claim 14
Claim 6
Claim 15
Claim 6
Claim 16
Claim 11
Claim 17
Claim 1
U.S. Patent No. 11,139,588 does not explicitly claim the display or the peripheral housing structures of the housing in these claims. However, it is well-known in the antenna art that the housing of electronic devices have peripheral housing structures and displays, and it would have been obvious to include peripheral housing structures and a display mounted to the sidewalls in order to allow a user to interact with the electronic device.
Claim 18
Claim 11
Claim 19
Claim 10
Claim 20
Claim 1
Claim 21
Claim 11
Claim 22
Claim 6
Claim 23
Claim 6
Claim 24
Claim 1
Claim 25
Claim 1
Claim 26
Claim 1
Claim 27
Claim 1
Claim 28
Claim 1
U.S. Patent No. 11,139,588 does not explicitly claim that the display is touch-sensitive. However, touch-sensitive displays are well-known in the antenna art. It would have been obvious to have the display be a touch-sensitive display to allow for a user to input or interact with the display.
Claim 29
Claim 1
Claim 30
Claim 9
Claims 11-30 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1, 4, 7, 10, 13 of U.S. Patent No. 11,811,133. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other as shown below:
Current Claims
U.S. Patent No. 11,811,133
Claim 11
Claim 1
U.S. Patent No. 11,811,133 does not explicitly claim the display in these claims. However, it is well-known in the antenna art that the housing of electronic devices have a displays, and it would have been obvious to include a display mounted to the sidewalls in order to allow a user to interact with the electronic device.
Claim 12
Claim 1
U.S. Patent No. 11,811,133 does not explicitly claim that the patch is directly fed, however it is known that patch antennas are either directly or indirectly fed. It would have been obvious to have the patch be directly fed as this is one of a finite number of ways to feed a patch antenna which can allow for a direct power transfer without losses from indirectly feeding.
Claim 13
Claim 7
Claim 14
Claim 13
Claim 15
Claim 13
Claim 16
Claim 10
Claim 17
Claim 1
U.S. Patent No. 11,811,133 does not explicitly claim the display in these claims. However, it is well-known in the antenna art that the housing of electronic devices have a displays, and it would have been obvious to include a display mounted to the sidewalls in order to allow a user to interact with the electronic device.
Claim 18
Claim 10
Claim 19
Claim 7
Claim 20
Claim 1
Claim 21
Claim 10
Claim 22
Claim 13
Claim 23
Claim 13
Claim 24
Claim 1
Claim 25
Claim 1
Claim 26
Claim 1
Claim 27
Claim 1
Claim 28
Claim 1
U.S. Patent No. 11,811,133 does not explicitly claim that the display is touch-sensitive. However, touch-sensitive displays are well-known in the antenna art. It would have been obvious to have the display be a touch-sensitive display to allow for a user to input or interact with the display.
Claim 29
Claim 1
Claim 30
Claim 4
Claims 11-13, 17, 20, 24-30 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claim 6 of U.S. Patent No. 10,978,797. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other as shown below:
Current Claims
U.S. Patent No. 10,978,797
Claim 11
Claim 1 + Claim 6
U.S. Patent No. 10,987,797 does not explicitly claim the display in these claims. However, it is well-known in the antenna art that the housing of electronic devices have a displays, and it would have been obvious to include a display mounted to the sidewalls in order to allow a user to interact with the electronic device.
Claim 12
Claim 1
U.S. Patent No. 10,978,797 does not explicitly claim that the patch is directly fed, however it is known that patch antennas are either directly or indirectly fed. It would have been obvious to have the patch be directly fed as this is one of a finite number of ways to feed a patch antenna which can allow for a direct power transfer without losses from indirectly feeding.
Claim 13
Claim 1
U.S. Patent No. 10,978,797 does not explicitly claim that the patch has a feed terminal, however it is known that patch antennas are either directly or indirectly fed, and if it were directly fed it would have a feed terminal. It would have been obvious to have the patch be directly fed as this is one of a finite number of ways to feed a patch antenna which can allow for a direct power transfer without losses from indirectly feeding.
Claim 17
Claim 1 + Claim 6
U.S. Patent No. 10,987,797 does not explicitly claim the display in these claims. However, it is well-known in the antenna art that the housing of electronic devices have a displays, and it would have been obvious to include a display mounted to the sidewalls in order to allow a user to interact with the electronic device.
Claim 20
Claim 1 + Claim 6
Claim 24
Claim 1 + Claim 6
Claim 25
Claim 1 + Claim 6
Claim 26
Claim 1
Claim 27
Claim 1 + Claim 6
Claim 28
Claim 1
U.S. Patent No. 10,987,797 does not explicitly claim that the display is touch-sensitive. However, touch-sensitive displays are well-known in the antenna art. It would have been obvious to have the display be a touch-sensitive display to allow for a user to input or interact with the display.
Claim 29
Claim 1
Claim 30
Claim 3
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.
Claims 11-19 and 21-30 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Li et al. (US 2014/0292591, hereby referred as Li) in view of Sudo et al. (US 2015/0194730, hereby referred as Sudo).
Regarding claim 11, Li teaches the following:
an electronic device comprising:
a housing (element 12, figures 3, 5, 10) having sidewalls (elements 12S, figure 5) and a dielectric layer (element 12R, figure 5, or element 12, figure 10 when the arrangement of 76, 46, and 78 is reversed, “the rear surface of device 10 (i.e., the surface opposing the front 20 side that contains display 14) may be formed from a planar dielectric structure (e.g., a glass plate, a ceramic plate, etc.). Antennas may be formed under this type of rear plate or under other dielectric device structures”, “housing structure 12R may be a rectangular planar member”, paragraphs [0045], [0048], [0058], [0081]) coupled to the sidewalls;
a display (element 52, figures 5, 10 or element 14, figure 3) mounted to the sidewalls opposite the dielectric layer;
a substrate (element 78, figure 10 when the arrangement of 76, 46, and 78 is reversed, paragraphs [0045], [0048], [0058], [0081]) having a surface facing the dielectric layer (“the rear surface of device 10 (i.e., the surface opposing the front 20 side that contains display 14) may be formed from a planar dielectric structure (e.g., a glass plate, a ceramic plate, etc.). Antennas may be formed under this type of rear plate or under other dielectric device structures”, “housing structure 12R may be a rectangular planar member”, paragraphs [0045], [0048], [0058], [0081]); and
an antenna (element 46, figures 5, 10) having a radiating patch (“The antenna or antennas formed by structures 46 may be … patch antennas” paragraphs [0035], [0063]), the antenna being configured to convey radio-frequency signals through the dielectric layer (paragraphs [0045], [0048], [0058], [0081]).
Li does not explicitly teach the radiating patch embedded in the substrate and having a parasitic patch at the surface of the substrate and overlapping the radiating patch. However, Li does suggest using various forms of antennas (paragraph [0063]).
Sudo suggests the teachings of the radiating patch (element 13, figures 1-3) embedded in the substrate (element 2, figures 1-3) and having a parasitic patch (element 16, figures 1-3) at the surface of the substrate and overlapping the radiating patch (as shown in figures 1-3).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to have replaced the radiating patch of Li with the radiating patch of Sudo which is embedded in the substrate and having a parasitic patch at the surface of the substrate and overlapping the radiating patch as suggested by the teachings of Li and Sudo which could be used to provide a better gain and directivity then when using a patch antenna alone without a parasitic patch.
Regarding claim 12, the combination of Li and Sudo as referred in claim 11 teaches the following:
wherein the radiating patch (Sudo, element 13, figures 1-3) is directly fed.
Regarding claim 13, the combination of Li and Sudo as referred in claim 11 teaches the following:
further comprising an antenna feed terminal (Sudo, where elements 14/15 connect to element 13, figures 1-3) on the radiating patch.
Regarding claim 14, the combination of Li and Sudo as referred in claim 11 teaches the following:
further comprising: an additional dielectric layer (Li, element 76, figure 10) between the dielectric layer (element 12R, figure 5, or element 12, figure 10, paragraphs [0045], [0048], [0058], [0081], when the arrangement of 76, 46, and 78 is reversed) (Sudo, element 2, figure 10, as explained in claim 11) and the substrate (Li, element 78, figure 10)(Sudo, element 2, figure 10, as explained in claim 17), the antenna being configured to convey the radio-frequency signals through the additional dielectric layer (Li, the adhesive 76 would inherently allow radio-frequency signals to go through it).
Regarding claim 15, the combination of Li and Sudo as referred in claim 14 teaches the following:
wherein the additional dielectric layer comprises adhesive (Li, element 76, figure 10).
Regarding claim 16, the combination of Li and Sudo as referred in claim 11 teaches the following:
wherein the parasitic patch (Sudo, element 16, figures 1-3) has a cross shape.
Regarding claim 17, Li teaches the following:
an electronic device comprising:
a housing (element 12, figures 3, 5, 10) having peripheral housing structures (elements 12S, figure 5) and a dielectric layer (element 12R, figure 5, or element 12, figure 10 when the arrangement of 76, 46, and 78 is reversed, “the rear surface of device 10 (i.e., the surface opposing the front 20 side that contains display 14) may be formed from a planar dielectric structure (e.g., a glass plate, a ceramic plate, etc.). Antennas may be formed under this type of rear plate or under other dielectric device structures”, “housing structure 12R may be a rectangular planar member”, paragraphs [0045], [0048], [0058], [0081]) mounted to the peripheral housing structures;
a display (element 52, figures 5, 10 or element 14, figure 3) mounted to the peripheral housing structures opposite the dielectric layer;
a substrate (element 78, figure 10 when the arrangement of 76, 46, and 78 is reversed, paragraphs [0045], [0048], [0058], [0081]) having a surface facing the dielectric layer (“the rear surface of device 10 (i.e., the surface opposing the front 20 side that contains display 14) may be formed from a planar dielectric structure (e.g., a glass plate, a ceramic plate, etc.). Antennas may be formed under this type of rear plate or under other dielectric device structures”, “housing structure 12R may be a rectangular planar member”, paragraphs [0045], [0048], [0058], [0081]); and
an antenna (element 46, figures 5, 10) having a fed patch (“The antenna or antennas formed by structures 46 may be … patch antennas” paragraphs [0035], [0063]), the antenna being configured to convey radio-frequency signals through the dielectric layer (paragraphs [0045], [0048], [0058], [0081]).
Li does not explicitly teach the antenna having a directly fed patch embedded in the substrate and having one or more parasitic patches at the surface of the substrate and overlapping the directly fed patch. However, Li does suggest using various forms of antennas (paragraph [0063]).
Sudo suggests the teachings of the antenna having a directly fed patch (element 13, figures 1-3) embedded in the substrate (element 2, figures 1-3) and having one or more parasitic patches (element 16, figures 1-3) at the surface of the substrate and overlapping the directly fed patch (as shown in figures 1-3).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to have replaced the radiating patch of Li with the radiating patch of Sudo which is a direclty fed patch antenna embedded in the substrate and having one or more parasitic patches at the surface of the substrate and overlapping the directly fed patch as suggested by the teachings of Li and Sudo in order to which could be used to provide a better gain and directivity then when using a patch antenna alone without a parasitic patch.
Regarding claim 18, the combination of Li and Sudo as referred in claim 17 teaches the following:
the one or more parasitic patches (Sudo, element 16, figures 1-3) having a first portion (Sudo, elements 16A, figures 1-3) extending along a first axis and a second portion (Sudo, elements 16B, figures 1-3) extending along a second axis orthogonal to the first axis.
Regarding claim 19, the combination of Li and Sudo as referred in claim 18 teaches the following:
further comprising: a first positive antenna feed terminal (Sudo, where element 14 connects to element 13, figures 1-3) coupled to the directly fed patch (Sudo, element 13, figures 1-3) and overlapping the first portion of the one or more parasitic patches (Sudo, element 16, figures 1-3); and
a second positive antenna feed terminal (Sudo, where element 15 connects to element 13, figures 1-3) coupled to the directly fed patch (Sudo, element 13, figures 1-3) and overlapping the second portion of the one or more parasitic patches (Sudo, element 16, figures 1-3).
Regarding claim 21, the combination of Li and Sudo as referred in claim 17 teaches the following:
wherein the one or more parasitic patches (Sudo, element 16, figures 1-3) have a cross shape.
Regarding claim 22, the combination of Li and Sudo as referred in claim 17 teaches the following:
further comprising: an additional dielectric layer (Li, element 76, figure 10) between the dielectric layer (element 12R, figure 5, or element 12, figure 10, paragraphs [0045], [0048], [0058], [0081], when the arrangement of 76, 46, and 78 is reversed) and the substrate (Li, element 78, figure 10)(Sudo, element 2, figure 10, as explained in claim 17), the antenna being configured to convey the radio-frequency signals through the additional dielectric layer (Li, the adhesive 76 would inherently allow radio-frequency signals to go through it).
Regarding claim 23, the combination of Li and Sudo as referred in claim 22 teaches the following:
wherein the additional dielectric layer comprises adhesive (Li, element 76, figure 10).
Regarding claim 24, the combination of Li and Sudo as referred in claim 17 teaches the following:
wherein the radio-frequency signals are at a frequency between 10 GHz and 300 GHz (Sudo, paragraph [0036]).
Regarding claim 25, the combination of Li and Sudo as referred in claim 17 teaches the following:
wherein the substrate (Li, element 78, figure 10)(Sudo, element 2, figure 10, as explained in claim 17) is coupled to the dielectric layer (Li, element 12R, figure 5, paragraphs [0045], [0048], [0058], [0081]).
Regarding claim 26, the combination of Li and Sudo as referred in claim 17 teaches the following:
wherein the housing (Li, element 12, figures 3, 5, 10) has a length and a width (Li, as shown in figures 3, 5) and the dielectric layer extends across the length and the width (Li, “the rear surface of device 10 (i.e., the surface opposing the front 20 side that contains display 14) may be formed from a planar dielectric structure (e.g., a glass plate, a ceramic plate, etc.). Antennas may be formed under this type of rear plate or under other dielectric device structures”, “housing structure 12R may be a rectangular planar member”, paragraphs [0045], [0048], [0058]).
Regarding claim 27, the combination of Li and Sudo as referred in claim 11 teaches the following:
wherein the radio-frequency signals are at a frequency between 10 GHz and 300 GHz (Sudo, paragraph [0036]).
Regarding claim 28, the combination of Li and Sudo as referred in claim 11 teaches the following:
wherein the display is touch-sensitive (Li, paragraph [0041]).
Regarding claim 29, the combination of Li and Sudo as referred in claim 11 teaches the following:
wherein the housing (Li, element 12, figures 3, 5, 10) has a length and a width (Li, as shown in figures 3, 5) and the dielectric layer extends across the length and the width (Li, “the rear surface of device 10 (i.e., the surface opposing the front 20 side that contains display 14) may be formed from a planar dielectric structure (e.g., a glass plate, a ceramic plate, etc.). Antennas may be formed under this type of rear plate or under other dielectric device structures”, “housing structure 12R may be a rectangular planar member”, paragraphs [0045], [0048], [0058]).
Regarding claim 30, the combination of Li and Sudo as referred in claim 11 teaches the following:
further comprising: a ground layer (Sudo, element 11, figures 1-3) in the substrate, wherein the directly fed patch (Sudo, element 13, figures 1-3) is interposed between the ground layer and the one or more parasitic patches (Sudo, element 16, figures 1-3).
Claim 20 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Li et al. (US 2014/0292591, hereby referred as Li) in view of Sudo et al. (US 2015/0194730, hereby referred as Sudo), and further in view of Mow et al. (US 2015/0280771, hereby referred as Mow).
Regarding claim 20, the combination of Li and Sudo as referred in claim 19 teaches the electronic device with the exception for the following:
further comprising a phased antenna array that includes the antenna. However, Li does teach that the antenna may be part of an array (paragraphs [0035], [0062]-[0063])
Mow suggests the teachings of further comprising a phased antenna array that includes the antenna (paragraphs [0044]). Mow also suggests when the antennas are against the rear of the housing (paragraph [0042]), and that the antennas can include parasitic elements (paragraphs [0070])
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to have the antenna of the combination of Li and Sudo to be included in a phased array as suggested by the teachings of Li and Mow which can allow the antenna to be steered in certain direction as desired which can improve the transmission and reception of the electronic device.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to AB SALAM ALKASSIM JR whose telephone number is (571)270-0449. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Thursday.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Dameon Levi can be reached at (571) 272-2105. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of published or unpublished applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Unpublished application information in Patent Center is available to registered users. To file and manage patent submissions in Patent Center, visit: https://patentcenter.uspto.gov. Visit https://www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/patent-center for more information about Patent Center and https://www.uspto.gov/patents/docx for information about filing in DOCX format. For additional questions, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/AB SALAM ALKASSIM JR/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2845
Prosecution Insights