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 .
Claim rejections under 35USC103
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.
3. Claims 1, 3 and 10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Shi US 11211698 B2 in view of Pecen et al US 2014022798 A1 (hereafter Pecen).
4. Consider claim 10. Shi teaches a wireless transceiver device (fig 3), for performing antenna tuning control (310) of the wireless transceiver device in a wireless communications system (fig 1), the wireless transceiver device (fig 3) being one of multiple devices within the wireless communications system, the wireless transceiver device comprising: a processing circuit (206), arranged to control operations of the wireless transceiver device (fig 3); and at least one communications control circuit (316), coupled to the processing circuit, arranged to perform communications control, wherein the at least one communications control circuit is arranged to perform wireless communications operations with a network within the wireless communications system for the wireless transceiver device; wherein: during a tuning stage among multiple stages (see different tuning states in Table 1), the wireless transceiver device is arranged to utilize the at least one communications control circuit (316) to obtain predetermined characterization data (Table 1) of at least one impedance-related tuning component (430 in fig 4) regarding antenna tuning of at least one antenna (301) from a storage device (338) within the wireless transceiver device, wherein the at least one impedance-related tuning component (430) comprises at least one aperture tuner (APT) (310), and the predetermined characterization data is determined in advance (Table 1) during a characterization stage among the multiple stages; during the tuning stage, the wireless transceiver device is arranged to utilize the at least one communications control circuit to measure ratio of any antenna among the at least one antenna (see reflective ratio described column 5, lines 2-8 in which the reflection coefficient is related to the VSWR); and during the tuning stage, the wireless transceiver device (fig3) is arranged to utilize the at least one communications control circuit (316) to determine at least one setting of the at least one impedance-related tuning component according to the predetermined characterization data (see look up table described in col 5, lines 45-67) and the measured ratio, for antenna performance optimization (see column 8, lines 58-62). Shi teaches measuring antenna impedance using a refection coefficient which is a ratio of the amplitude and relative phase, but doesn’t teach measuring the VSWR. However, Pecen teaches such (see fig 3, abstract, fig 19 and fig 20 for look up table). It would have been an obvious substitution, before the effective date, of one power measurement for another to use the VSWR measurement taught by Pecen in Shi to have a more accurate antenna tuning.
5. Method claim 1 is rejected for the same reasons as apparatus claim 1 since the recited elements would perform the claimed steps.
6. For what is called for in claim 3, see column 1, lines 59-60 of Shi.
7. Claims 2, 5 and 6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Shi US 11211698 B2 in view of Pecen et al US 2014022798 A1 further in view of Cha US 20220052743 A1.
8. Consider claim 2. The combination of Shi and Pecen fail to teach a separate impedance tuner (although both Shi and Pecen both teach an impedance component in their respective tuning circuits). However, to have a separate impedance tuning circuit is well known in the art as taught by Cha (310 in fig 3). It would have been obvious, before the effective date to have a separate and distinct impedance circuit as taught by Cha, added to the aperture tuning circuit of Shi to have a more robust and faster antenna tuning system.
9. For what is called for in claim 5 with respect to the impedance tuning components see fig 3b of Cha. For the aperture tuning see fig 3c of Cha. Both are “one-type among different types” of tuning components.
10. For what is called for in claim 6, see 535 in fig 5 of Shi where the separate tuning components can be seen in fig 4.
11. Claims 4, 7-9 and 11 are 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.
12. Regarding claim 4, the prior art of record fails to teach or make obvious determining the predetermined characterization data according to the calibration flow for the CLAT with joint characterization of the at least one APT and the at least one IMT.
13. Regarding claim 7, the prior art of record fails to teach or make obvious executing a calibration flow to perform hardware characterization on said different types of impedance-related tuning components, in order to determine the predetermined characterization data, for being used in the tuning stage.
14. Regarding claim 8, the prior art of record fails to teach or make obvious performing hardware characterization on the at least one impedance-related tuning component, in order to determine the predetermined characterization data, for being used in the tuning stage.
15. Regarding claims 9 and 11, the prior art of record fails to teach or make obvious a first APT among the at least one APT comprises a built-in calibration kit for providing reference impedances regarding at least three settings, respectively, wherein the at least three settings comprise an open setting, a short setting and at least one load setting; and during the characterization stage, the communications control circuit is arranged to determine the predetermined characterization data according to the reference impedances provided by the first APT.
16. The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
17. Apaydin US-20250326901-A1 discloses an antenna system that includes both an aperture tuner and impedance tuner (fig 5), configured to shift the frequency response of the antenna, and an impedance tuner, configured to dynamically change the amount of radiated power for the antenna. This combined approach helps manage complex low-band frequency requirements.
Conclusion
18. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CURTIS A KUNTZ whose telephone number is (571)272-7499. The examiner can normally be reached on M-Th from 6am to 230pm and Fri from 6am to 10am.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Matthew D Anderson, can be reached at telephone number 5712724177. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from Patent Center. Status information for published applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Patent Center to authorized users only. Should you have questions about access to the USPTO patent electronic filing system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free).
Examiner interviews are available via a variety of formats. See MPEP § 713.01. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) Form at https://www.uspto.gov/InterviewPractice.
/CURTIS A KUNTZ/Primary examiner, Art Unit 2646