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 filed 05/11/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant argued on P. 9-10 with respect to independent claims 1, 20 that “Park fails to describe "the first antenna array comprises a first number of antenna elements in a first array shape" and "the second antenna array comprises a second number of antenna elements in a second array shape different than the first array shape, the second number of antenna elements being different than the first number of antenna elements," as recited in amended claim 1”. Examiner respectfully disagrees. As seen from Park et al. Fig. 15 as shown in the rejection below, the first antenna array comprises a first number of antenna elements (9110, 9115 each have at least 4 conductive patches for a total of 8 antenna elements as seen in Fig. 15) in a first array shape (first array shape includes 9110, 9115 “four or more conductive patches” Par. 0281 Fig 15); and the second antenna array comprises a second number of antenna elements (12 antenna elements as seen in Fig. 15 since 9120 has 4 dipole antennas, having 2 elements each for 8 dipole elements, and 9130 has 4 monopole antennas) in a second array shape different than the first array shape (second array shape includes 9120, 9130 having dipoles and monopole antennas Par. 0285, 0290 Fig 15), the second number of antenna elements being different than the first number of antenna elements (12 antenna elements in 9120, 9130 which is a different number from the 8 antenna elements of 9110, 9115 as seen in Fig. 15). Thus the rejection for claims 1-16 & 20 is maintained.
Applicant argued on P. 11-12 with respect to independent claim 17 that “Park fails to describe "a first antenna array disposed on a first substrate in a first plane, wherein the first antenna array is associated with a first ground plane and comprises a first number of antenna elements in a first array shape" (emphasis added) and "a second antenna array disposed on a second substrate in a second plane wherein the second plane is different than and nonparallel with the first plane and comprises second number of antenna elements in a second array shape different than the first array shape, the second number of antenna elements being different than the first number of antenna elements" (emphasis added) as recited in amended claim 17” Examiner respectfully disagrees. As seen from Park et al. Fig. 15 as shown in the rejection below, a first antenna array (AR1, AR2 / 9110, 9115 Figs 5, 7, 8a, 8b, 15, 16 Par. 0135, 0217, 0276 “The antenna module 900 shown in FIGS. 15 and 16 may partially include the elements and structures of the antenna module 500 shown in FIGS. 5 to 14. In the description of FIGS. 15 and 16, the same reference numerals will be assigned to the elements substantially the same as those of the antenna module 500 shown in FIGS. 5 to 14” Par. 0272)…and comprises a first number of antenna elements (9110, 9115 each have at least 4 conductive patches for a total of 8 antenna elements as seen in Fig. 15) in a first array shape (first array shape includes 9110, 9115 “four or more conductive patches” Par. 0281 Fig 15); and a second antenna array (AR3, AR4 / 9120, 9130 Figs 5, 7, 8a, 8b, 15, 16 Par. 0145, 0221, 0276, 0290 “The antenna module 900 shown in FIGS. 15 and 16 may partially include the elements and structures of the antenna module 500 shown in FIGS. 5 to 14. In the description of FIGS. 15 and 16, the same reference numerals will be assigned to the elements substantially the same as those of the antenna module 500 shown in FIGS. 5 to 14” Par. 0272)…wherein the second plane is different than and nonparallel with the first plane (520 and 530 are in different planes perpendicular to each other Figs 5, 7, 8a, 8b, see XYZ planes Fig. 15 and perpendicular planes in Fig. 16) and comprises a second number of antenna elements (12 antenna elements as seen in Fig. 15 since 9120 has 4 dipole antennas, having 2 elements each for 8 dipole elements, and 9130 has 4 monopole antennas) in a second array shape different than the first array shape (second array shape includes 9120, 9130 having dipoles and monopole antennas Par. 0285, 0290 Fig 15), the second number of antenna elements being different than the first number of antenna elements (12 antenna elements in 9120, 9130 which is a different number from the 8 antenna elements of 9110, 9115 as seen in Fig. 15). Thus the rejection for claims 17-19 is maintained.
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 1, 3, 5, 7, 8, 16 & 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Park et al. US Patent Application Publication 2022/0336967 (cited by applicant).
Regarding Claim 1, Park et al. teaches a millimeter wave (mmW) module (Figs 4a, 4b, 5, 6a, 7, 8a, 8b, 15, 16) comprising:
a first antenna array (AR1, AR2 / 9110, 9115 Figs 5, 7, 8a, 8b, 15, 16 Par. 0135, 0217, 0276 “The antenna module 900 shown in FIGS. 15 and 16 may partially include the elements and structures of the antenna module 500 shown in FIGS. 5 to 14. In the description of FIGS. 15 and 16, the same reference numerals will be assigned to the elements substantially the same as those of the antenna module 500 shown in FIGS. 5 to 14” Par. 0272) disposed on a first surface of a first substrate in a first plane (top surface of 520 / 920 Figs 5, 7, 8a, 8b, 15 Par. 0135, 0217, 0273), wherein the first antenna array is associated with a first ground plane (“ground layer of the second substrate 520” / of 920 Par. 0141, 0296, 0297), and wherein the first antenna array comprises a first number of antenna elements (9110, 9115 each have at least 4 conductive patches for a total of 8 antenna elements as seen in Fig. 15) in a first array shape (first array shape includes 9110, 9115 “four or more conductive patches” Par. 0281 Fig 15);
a second antenna array (AR3, AR4 / 9120, 9130 Figs 5, 7, 8a, 8b, 15, 16 Par. 0145, 0221, 0276, 0290 “The antenna module 900 shown in FIGS. 15 and 16 may partially include the elements and structures of the antenna module 500 shown in FIGS. 5 to 14. In the description of FIGS. 15 and 16, the same reference numerals will be assigned to the elements substantially the same as those of the antenna module 500 shown in FIGS. 5 to 14” Par. 0272) disposed on a second substrate in a second plane (530 Figs 5, 7, 8a, 8b Par. 0145, 0221 / better seen in Fig. 16), wherein the second antenna array is associated with a second ground plane (5210 Figs 5, 7, 8a, 8b Par. 0145, 0221), wherein the second plane is different than and nonparallel with the first plane (520 and 530 are in different planes perpendicular to each other Figs 5, 7, 8a, 8b, see XYZ planes Fig. 15 and perpendicular planes in Fig. 16), wherein the second antenna array comprises a second number of antenna elements (12 antenna elements as seen in Fig. 15 since 9120 has 4 dipole antennas, having 2 elements each for 8 dipole elements, and 9130 has 4 monopole antennas) in a second array shape different than the first array shape (second array shape includes 9120, 9130 having dipoles and monopole antennas Par. 0285, 0290 Fig 15), the second number of antenna elements being different than the first number of antenna elements (12 antenna elements in 9120, 9130 which is a different number from the 8 antenna elements of 9110, 9115 as seen in Fig. 15);
one or more solder bump connections disposed on the first substrate (440-1, 440-2 Fig. 4B Par. 0125);
millimeter wave (mmW) circuitry (RFIC 452 Fig. 4B Par. 0125) connected to the one or more solder bump connections (Fig. 4B Par. 0125); and
a connector physically coupling the second substrate to the first substrate (“The second substrate 520 and the third substrate 530 may be integrally formed of a ceramic material and may be coupled to the first substrate 510 using a chip bonding method” Par. 0144), wherein the mmW circuitry is coupled via the one or more solder bump connections to the first antenna array, the connector, and the second antenna array (“The RFIC 452 may be electrically connected to the antenna element 436 through the first solder bump 440-1, the transmission line 423, and the feeder 425, to the ground layer 433 through the second solder bump 440-2 and the conductive via 435, and to the above-mentioned module interface through the signal line 429” Par. 0125, additionally, Fig. 6a shows the connections between RFIC 542 and the antennas and substrates 520, 530 through solders 613, 615, 617, 619 Par. 0159-0161).
Regarding Claim 3, Park et al. teaches wherein the first substrate is disposed on a back surface of a device substrate (Figs. 20-25); wherein the second substrate is disposed at a top end of the device substrate (Figs. 20-25).
Regarding Claim 5, Park et al. teaches wherein the one or more solder bump connections comprises separate solder bump nodes for a plurality of polarization and frequency band signal paths (implied from Figs. 6A-D and Par. 0140 for dual polarization and Figs. 17, 18 Par. 0083-0085, 0302 for multiple frequencies).
Regarding Claim 7, Park et al. teaches wherein the first array shape is a one element by three element array configuration (901, 903, 905 Fig. 15 Par. 0277); and wherein the second array shape is a two element by two element array configuration (921, 923 Fig. 15 Par. 0285).
Regarding Claim 8, Park et al. teaches wherein the first plane is approximately perpendicular to the second plane (Fig. 8A, 15, 16).
Regarding Claim 16, Park et al. teaches wherein the mmW module is integrated within a wireless transceiver of a wireless communication apparatus (Fig. 2 Par. 0082).
Regarding Claim 20, Park et al. teaches a millimeter wave (mmW) module (Figs 4a, 4b, 5, 6a, 7, 8a, 8b, 15, 16) comprising:
a first antenna array (AR1, AR2 / 9110, 9115 Figs 5, 7, 8a, 8b, 15, 16 Par. 0135, 0217, 0276 “The antenna module 900 shown in FIGS. 15 and 16 may partially include the elements and structures of the antenna module 500 shown in FIGS. 5 to 14. In the description of FIGS. 15 and 16, the same reference numerals will be assigned to the elements substantially the same as those of the antenna module 500 shown in FIGS. 5 to 14” Par. 0272) disposed on a first surface of a first substrate in a first plane (top surface of 520 / 920 Figs 5, 7, 8a, 8b, 15 Par. 0135, 0217, 0273), wherein the first antenna array is associated with a first ground plane (“ground layer of the second substrate 520” / of 920 Par. 0141, 0296, 0297), and wherein the first antenna array comprises first number of antenna elements (9110, 9115 each have at least 4 conductive patches for a total of 8 antenna elements as seen in Fig. 15) in a first array shape (first array shape includes 9110, 9115 “four or more conductive patches” Par. 0281 Fig 15);
a second antenna array (AR3, AR4 / 9120, 9130 Figs 5, 7, 8a, 8b, 15, 16 Par. 0145, 0221, 0276, 0290 “The antenna module 900 shown in FIGS. 15 and 16 may partially include the elements and structures of the antenna module 500 shown in FIGS. 5 to 14. In the description of FIGS. 15 and 16, the same reference numerals will be assigned to the elements substantially the same as those of the antenna module 500 shown in FIGS. 5 to 14” Par. 0272) disposed on a second substrate in a second plane (530 Figs 5, 7, 8a, 8b, 15, 16 Par. 0145, 0221 / better seen in Fig. 16), wherein the second antenna array is associated with a second ground plane (5210 Figs 5, 7, 8a, 8b Par. 0145, 0221), wherein the second plane is different than the first plane (520 and 530 are in different planes perpendicular to each other Figs 5, 7, 8a, 8b, see XYZ planes Fig. 15 and perpendicular planes in Fig. 16), wherein the second antenna array comprises a second number of antenna elements (12 antenna elements as seen in Fig. 15 since 9120 has 4 dipole antennas, having 2 elements each for 8 dipole elements, and 9130 has 4 monopole antennas) in a second array shape different than the first array shape (second array shape includes 9120, 9130 having dipoles and monopole antennas Par. 0285, 0290 Fig 15), the second number of antenna elements being different than the first number of antenna elements (12 antenna elements in 9120, 9130 which is a different number from the 8 antenna elements of 9110, 9115 as seen in Fig. 15);
mmW circuitry (RFIC 452 Fig. 4B Par. 0125); and
means for electrically coupling the mmW circuitry with the first antenna array and the second antenna array, wherein the means for electrically coupling comprises a plurality of solder bump connections on the first substrate (“The RFIC 452 may be electrically connected to the antenna element 436 through the first solder bump 440-1, the transmission line 423, and the feeder 425, to the ground layer 433 through the second solder bump 440-2 and the conductive via 435, and to the above-mentioned module interface through the signal line 429” Par. 0125, additionally, Fig. 6a shows the connections between RFIC 542 and the antennas and substrates 520, 530 through solders 613, 615, 617, 619, 641, 643 Par. 0159-0161) which are nearer to an edge of the first substrate closest the second antenna array than they are to a center of the first substrate (617, 619, 641 and 643 Fig. 6A).
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.
Claim 2 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Park et al. US Patent Application Publication 2022/0336967 (cited by applicant) and Takayama et al. US Patent Application Publication 2020/0119453.
Regarding Claim 2, Park et al. teaches wherein a solder bump connection of the one or more solder bump connections is disposed on a second surface of the first substrate opposite the first surface (better seen in Figs. 4B, 6A).
Park et al. is silent on wherein the first ground plane is larger than the second ground plane.
However, Takayama et al. teaches “the size of the ground electrode layers 90G and 91G of the second flat plate portion 100 b, the radiation electrode 21 a, the dielectric layer 15, and the transmission line layer in the above direction can be smaller than λ/2, which is a frequency that is used” Par. 0067.
In this particular case, selecting the size of the ground plane is common and well known in the antenna art as evident by Takayama et al. based on the required size for the frequency band of operation.
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to provide the first ground plane of Park et al. to be larger than the second ground plane based on the teachings of Takayama et al. as a result effect in order to provide the respective antenna arrays with the required size for the respective frequency band of operation.
Claims 4 & 6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Park et al. US Patent Application Publication 2022/0336967 (cited by applicant).
Regarding Claim 4, Park et al. teaches wherein the second substrate is disposed on a back surface of a device substrate (Figs. 20-25); wherein the first substrate is disposed at a top end of the device substrate (Figs. 20-25).
Park et al. is silent on wherein a number of antenna elements in the first antenna array is greater than a number of antenna elements in the second antenna array.
However, Park et al. teaches “each array may include four or more conductive patches” Par. 0138, 0148, 0281; and “an antenna array including a plurality of antenna elements to be used in beamforming” Par. 0091; and “The antenna array 430 may include a plurality of antenna elements 432, 434, 436, and 438 (e.g., conductive patches) arranged to form directional beams. The antenna elements 432, 434, 436, or 438 may be formed on the first surface of the PCB 410 as shown. The antenna array 430 may be formed inside the PCB 410. According to some embodiments, the antenna array 430 may include a plurality of antenna arrays (e.g., dipole antenna arrays and/or patch antenna arrays) having the same shape or different shapes and/or different types” Par. 0116.
In this particular case, providing the first antenna array with a greater number of antenna elements than the second antenna array is common and well known in the antenna art as evident by Park et al. to obtain the corresponding beamforming pattern.
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to provide the first antenna array with a greater number of antenna elements than the second antenna array based on the teachings of Park et al. as a result effect in order to obtain the corresponding beamforming pattern.
Regarding Claim 6, Park et al. teaches the mmW module of claim 5 as shown in the rejection above.
Park et al. is silent on wherein the one or more solder bump connections comprises: a first solder bump node associated with a first high frequency band path for a first polarization; a second solder bump node associated with a second high frequency band path for a second polarization different than the first polarization; a third solder bump node associated with a first low frequency band path with the first polarization; and a fourth solder bump node associated with a second low frequency band path with the second polarization.
However, Park et al. teaches “the first antenna elements 501, 503, 505, and 507 of the first antenna array AR1 may operate in a band of about 25 GHz to 30 GHz. The second antenna elements 5010, 5030, 5050, and 5070 of the second antenna array AR2 may operate in a band of about 35 GHz to 40 GHz. The first antenna array AR1 and the second antenna array AR2 may transmit and receive a polarized wave of plus or minus ninety degrees (±90°), respectively” Par. 0137, and “The third antenna elements 5211, 5231, 5251, and 5271 of the third antenna array AR3 may operate in a lower band area than the fourth antenna elements 5311, 5331, 5351, and 5371 of the fourth antenna array AR4, such as about 25 GHz to 30 GHz. The fourth antenna elements 5311, 5331, 5351, and 5371 of the fourth antenna array AR4 may operate in a band of about 35 GHz to 40 GHz. The third antenna array AR3 and the fourth antenna array AR4 may transmit and receive a polarized wave of plus or minus forty-five degrees (±45°), respectively.” Par. 0147.
In this particular case, configuring solder bump nodes for respective frequency bands and polarizations is common and well known in the art as evident by Park et al. since the antenna arrays operate in dual polarizations as well as low and high frequency bands of operation.
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to associate a first through fourth solder bump nodes with respective frequency band path and respective polarization based on the teachings of Park et al. as a result effect to obtain dual polarization and operate in a band of 25 GHz to 30 GHz, and a band of about 35 GHz to 40 GHz.
Claims 9-15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Park et al. US Patent Application Publication 2022/0336967 (cited by applicant) and Takayama et al. US Patent Application Publication 2020/0119453 as applied to claim 2 above, and further in view of Han et al. US Patent Application Publication 2021/0280959.
Regarding Claim 9, Park et al. as modified teaches the mmW module of claim 2 as shown in the rejection above.
Park et al. is silent on further comprising: a third antenna array disposed on a third substrate in a third plane, wherein the third plane is different than the first plane and the second plane, and wherein the third antenna array comprises a plurality of antenna elements in a third array shape.
However, Han et al. teaches a third antenna array disposed on a third substrate in a third plane (240a Figs. 14, 15 Par. 0054-0057 having antennas 450 a, 450 b, 450 c, 450 d shown in Figs. 5-9 Par. 0042, 0044, 0067), wherein the third plane is different than the first plane and the second plane (Figs. 14, 15), and wherein the third antenna array comprises a plurality of antenna elements in a third array shape (antennas 450 a, 450 b, 450 c, 450 d shown in Figs. 5-9 Par. 0042, 0044, 0067).
In this particular case, providing a third antenna array disposed on a third substrate in a third plane different from the first plane and the second plane is common and well known in the antenna art as evident by Han et al. to provide better wireless transmission and reception performance in multiple different directions (Par. 0032).
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to provide the mmW module of Park et al. with a third antenna array disposed on a third substrate in a third plane different from the first plane and the second based on the teachings of Han et al. as a result effect in order to provide better wireless transmission and reception performance in multiple different directions.
Regarding Claim 10, Park et al. as modified teaches wherein the third plane is approximately perpendicular to the first plane and the second plane (Han et al. Figs. 14, 15 as modified above to provide better wireless transmission and reception performance in multiple different directions).
Regarding Claim 11, Park et al. as modified teaches wherein the first array shape is a two element by four element array configuration (AR1 and AR2 / / 9110, 9115 Figs. 8A, 15), wherein the second array shape is a one element by four element array configuration (AR3 / 9130 Figs. 8A, 15), and wherein the third array shape is a one element by four element array configuration (Han et al. antennas 450 a, 450 b, 450 c, 450 d seen in Fig. 4 as modified above to provide better wireless transmission and reception performance in multiple different directions).
Regarding Claim 12, Park et al. as modified teaches wherein the third plane is approximately perpendicular to the first plane and approximately parallel to the second plane (Han et al. Figs. 14, 15 as modified above to provide better wireless transmission and reception performance in multiple different directions).
Regarding Claim 13, Park et al. as modified teaches wherein the first array shape is a one element by three element array configuration (AR1 / 901, 903, 905 Figs. 8A, 15), wherein the second array shape is a two element by one element array configuration (5211 and 5311/ 921 Figs. 8A, 15), and wherein the third array shape is a one element by three element array configuration (Han et al. antennas 450 a, 450 b, 450 c seen in Fig. 4 as modified above to provide better wireless transmission and reception performance in multiple different directions).
Regarding Claim 14, Park et al. as modified teaches wherein: the first array shape is a one element by two element array configuration (AR1 / 901, 903 Figs. 8A, 15), the second array shape is a one element by three element array configuration (AR3 / 931, 933, 935 Figs. 8A, 15), and the third array shape is a one element by three element array configuration (Han et al. antennas 450 a, 450 b, 450 c seen in Fig. 4 as modified above to provide better wireless transmission and reception performance in multiple different directions); and the third antenna array is offset from the second antenna array, such that a middle array element of the second antenna array is adjacent to a side array element of the third antenna array (implied from arrangement of substrates seen in Han et al. Fig. 14 where a middle antenna array element on substrate 240b would be adjacent to a side array element of substrate 220).
Regarding Claim 15, Park et al. as modified teaches wherein the third plane is approximately parallel to the first plane and approximately perpendicular to the second plane (Han et al. Figs. 14, 15 as modified above to provide better wireless transmission and reception performance in multiple different directions).
Claims 17-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Park et al. US Patent Application Publication 2022/0336967 (cited by applicant) and Han et al. US Patent Application Publication 2021/0280959.
Regarding Claim 17, Park et al. teaches a millimeter wave (mmW) module (Figs 4a, 4b, 5, 6a, 7, 8a, 8b, 15, 16) comprising:
a first antenna array (AR1, AR2 / 9110, 9115 Figs 5, 7, 8a, 8b, 15, 16 Par. 0135, 0217, 0276 “The antenna module 900 shown in FIGS. 15 and 16 may partially include the elements and structures of the antenna module 500 shown in FIGS. 5 to 14. In the description of FIGS. 15 and 16, the same reference numerals will be assigned to the elements substantially the same as those of the antenna module 500 shown in FIGS. 5 to 14” Par. 0272) disposed on a first substrate in a first plane (top surface of 520 / 920 Figs 5, 7, 8a, 8b, 15 Par. 0135, 0217, 0273), wherein the first antenna array is associated with a first ground plane (“ground layer of the second substrate 520” / of 920 Par. 0141, 0296, 0297) and comprises a first number of antenna elements (9110, 9115 each have at least 4 conductive patches for a total of 8 antenna elements as seen in Fig. 15) in a first array shape (first array shape includes 9110, 9115 “four or more conductive patches” Par. 0281 Fig 15);
a second antenna array (AR3, AR4 / 9120, 9130 Figs 5, 7, 8a, 8b, 15, 16 Par. 0145, 0221, 0276, 0290 “The antenna module 900 shown in FIGS. 15 and 16 may partially include the elements and structures of the antenna module 500 shown in FIGS. 5 to 14. In the description of FIGS. 15 and 16, the same reference numerals will be assigned to the elements substantially the same as those of the antenna module 500 shown in FIGS. 5 to 14” Par. 0272) disposed on a second substrate in a second plane (530 Figs 5, 7, 8a, 8b Par. 0145, 0221), wherein the second antenna array is associated with a second ground plane (5210 Figs 5, 7, 8a, 8b Par. 0145, 0221), wherein the second plane is different than and nonparallel with the first plane (520 and 530 are in different planes perpendicular to each other Figs 5, 7, 8a, 8b, see XYZ planes Fig. 15 and perpendicular planes in Fig. 16) and comprises a second number of antenna elements (12 antenna elements as seen in Fig. 15 since 9120 has 4 dipole antennas, having 2 elements each for 8 dipole elements, and 9130 has 4 monopole antennas) in a second array shape different than the first array shape (second array shape includes 9120, 9130 having dipoles and monopole antennas Par. 0285, 0290 Fig 15), the second number of antenna elements being different than the first number of antenna elements (12 antenna elements in 9120, 9130 which is a different number from the 8 antenna elements of 9110, 9115 as seen in Fig. 15);
one or more solder bump connections disposed on the first substrate (440-1, 440-2 Fig. 4B Par. 0125);
mmW circuitry (RFIC 452 Fig. 4B Par. 0125) connected to the one or more solder bump connections (Fig. 4B Par. 0125);
a first connector physically coupling the second substrate to the first substrate (“The second substrate 520 and the third substrate 530 may be integrally formed of a ceramic material and may be coupled to the first substrate 510 using a chip bonding method” Par. 0144); wherein the mmW circuitry is coupled via the one or more solder bump connections to the first antenna array, the first connector, the second antenna array (“The RFIC 452 may be electrically connected to the antenna element 436 through the first solder bump 440-1, the transmission line 423, and the feeder 425, to the ground layer 433 through the second solder bump 440-2 and the conductive via 435, and to the above-mentioned module interface through the signal line 429” Par. 0125, additionally, Fig. 6a shows the connections between RFIC 542 and the antennas and substrates 520, 530 through solders 613, 615, 617, 619 Par. 0159-0161);
a third substrate (510 Figs 5, 7, 8a, 8b, 15 Par. 0144, 0220);
and a second connector physically coupling the third substrate to the first substrate or the second substrate (“The second substrate 520 and the third substrate 530 may be integrally formed of a ceramic material and may be coupled to the first substrate 510 using a chip bonding method” Par. 0144).
Park et al. is silent on a third antenna array disposed on a third substrate, wherein the third antenna array is associated with a third ground plane; wherein the mmW circuitry is coupled via the one or more solder bump connections to the second connector and the third antenna array.
However, Han et al. teaches a third antenna array disposed on a third substrate (240a Figs. 14, 15 Par. 0054-0057 having antennas 450 a, 450 b, 450 c, 450 d shown in Figs. 5-9 Par. 0042, 0044, 0067).
In this particular case, providing a third antenna array disposed on a third substrate is common and well known in the antenna art as evident by Han et al. to provide better wireless transmission and reception performance in multiple different directions (Par. 0032). Additionally, providing a third ground plane and solder bump connections for the third antenna array via the mmW circuitry is implied to enable the antenna array to operate.
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to provide the mmW module of Park et al. with a third antenna array disposed on a third substrate based on the teachings of Han et al. as a result effect in order to provide better wireless transmission and reception performance in multiple different directions.
Regarding Claim 18, Park et al. as modified teaches the mmW module of claim 17, wherein the one or more solder bump connections comprises separate solder bump nodes for a plurality of polarization and frequency band signal paths (implied from Figs. 6A-D and Par. 0140 for dual polarization and Figs. 17, 18 Par. 0083-0085, 0302 for multiple frequencies).
Regarding Claim 19, Park et al. as modified teaches the mmW module of claim 18 as shown in the rejection above.
Park et al. is silent on wherein the one or more solder bump connections comprise: a first solder bump node associated with a first high frequency band path for a first polarization; a second solder bump node associated with a second high frequency band path for a second polarization different than the first polarization; a third solder bump node associated with a first low frequency band path with the first polarization; and a fourth solder bump node associated with a second low frequency band path with the second polarization.
However, Park et al. teaches “the first antenna elements 501, 503, 505, and 507 of the first antenna array AR1 may operate in a band of about 25 GHz to 30 GHz. The second antenna elements 5010, 5030, 5050, and 5070 of the second antenna array AR2 may operate in a band of about 35 GHz to 40 GHz. The first antenna array AR1 and the second antenna array AR2 may transmit and receive a polarized wave of plus or minus ninety degrees (±90°), respectively” Par. 0137, and “The third antenna elements 5211, 5231, 5251, and 5271 of the third antenna array AR3 may operate in a lower band area than the fourth antenna elements 5311, 5331, 5351, and 5371 of the fourth antenna array AR4, such as about 25 GHz to 30 GHz. The fourth antenna elements 5311, 5331, 5351, and 5371 of the fourth antenna array AR4 may operate in a band of about 35 GHz to 40 GHz. The third antenna array AR3 and the fourth antenna array AR4 may transmit and receive a polarized wave of plus or minus forty-five degrees (±45°), respectively.” Par. 0147.
In this particular case, configuring solder bump nodes for respective frequency bands and polarizations is common and well known in the art as evident by Park et al. since the antenna arrays operate in dual polarizations as well as low and high frequency bands of operation.
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to associate a first through fourth solder bump nodes with respective frequency band path and respective polarization based on the teachings of Park et al. as a result effect to obtain dual polarization and operate in a band of 25 GHz to 30 GHz, and a band of about 35 GHz to 40 GHz.
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 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