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 .
Priority
Acknowledgment is made of applicant’s claim for foreign priority under 35 U.S.C. 119 (a)-(d).
Response to Amendment
The amendments filed on November 19th 2025 have been entered. Claims 1-3,7-9,11-12 and 17-18 are currently pending. Applicants’ amendments to claims have overcome the objections set forth in the Non-Final Office Action mailed on September 12th 2025.
Drawings
The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. Therefore, the “one of two distinct impedance-matching circuits, a first path providing an impedance match suitable for a middle band or a high band, and a second path providing an impedance match suitable for a low band” as recited in claim 11 must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). No new matter should be entered.
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112:
The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention.
Claim 11-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention.
“one of two distinct impedance-matching circuits” as recited in claim 11 constitutes new matter. The specifications never explicitly disclose impedance-matching circuits, much less two distinct impedance matching circuits. All it ever disclose are paths which when selected provide an impedance match. This does not constitute the existence of impedance matching circuits since an impedance match can be done through something like path length/geometry or ground plane/device structure. Furthermore no structural relationship is given for an impedance matching circuits and how they would relate to the other parts of the invention like the signal paths and what components make up this impedance matching circuit. The drawings also never clearly show any impedance matching circuits or any labels/numbering pointing to one. As such due to the lack of a written description, labels, and drawings for these “two distinct impedance-matching circuits” said limitation constitutes new matter since one of ordinary skill in the art would have not have known of these components.
Claim 12-20 inherit the subject matter of claim 11 and thus also constitute new matter.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claim 11-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Claim 11 is indefinite due to the limitation “a first switch configured to selectively connect the antenna to one of two distinct impedance-matching circuits, a first path providing an impedance match suitable for a middle band or a high band, and a second path providing an impedance match suitable for a low band” is indefinite. It is unclear what exactly constitutes an impedance matching circuit and where exactly these two impedance matching circuits are. Furthermore it is unclear whether the paths are a part of said impedance matching circuit and separate form. Due to this is it also unclear how exactly the paths impedance match, are they both connected to one impedance matching circuit, each connected to one of the two, or connected to completely separate impedance matching devices? None of these can be ascertained form the drawings or the specifications. For the purposes of examination the examiner as best understood will interpret the claim limitation to mean “ a first switch configured to selectively connect the antenna to one of two distinct impedance-matching circuits, a first path providing an impedance match suitable for a middle band or a high band through the one of two distinct impedance-matching circuits, and a second path providing an impedance match suitable for a low band through the one of two distinct impedance-matching circuits”.
Claims 12-20 inherit the indefiniteness of claim 11.
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.
Claim(s) 11-12 and 19-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ghaemi et al. (IDS Reference US 11115511 B1) in view of Lin et al. (CN 209860131 U).
Regarding Claim 11 as best understood, Ghaemi et al. discloses an electronic device (Electronic device is discloses in figure 1-9 of Ghaemi et al.) comprising:
a first housing (103b can serve as a first housing portion; Paragraph 44-52 and figure 3-6 of Ghaemi et al.);
a second housing (103a can serve as a second housing portion; Paragraph 44-52 and figure 3-6 of Ghaemi et al.);
a printed circuit board disposed in the first housing or the second housing (Housing includes a PCB that is disposed in the space of the first or second housing as needed; Paragraph 50-51 of Ghaemi et al.);
a hinge structure comprising a hinge disposed between the first housing and the second housing and configured to allow the first housing and the second housing to be folded or unfolded (One of the housing can be configured to be flipped about 105 to allow them to be in a folded or unfolded state wherein said flipping is accomplished by a hinge structure as seen in figure 3f and hinge structure comprise hinge components like 908a-b; Paragraph 24-52 and figure 1-9 of Ghaemi et al.); and
a wireless communication circuit configured to transmit and/or receive radio signals in a plurality of frequency bands through at least a portion of the first housing and at least a portion of the second housing (Electronic device includes a wireless communication system 111 with transceivers serving as wireless communication circuits that transmit/receive signals to antennas 137 which may be configured as portions of the housing; Paragraph 35-52 and figure 1 and 3-6 of Ghaemi et al.),
wherein the first housing includes a first metal frame formed into a plurality of portions through a plurality of first non-conductive portions (First housing 103b may be divided into portions 137b and 137d by a plurality of segmenting portions that are non-conductive wherein first housing includes a metal frame; Paragraph 46-52 and figure 3-6 of Ghaemi et al.),
wherein the second housing includes a second metal frame formed into a plurality of portions through a plurality of second non-conductive portions (First housing 103a may be divided into portions 137a and 137c by a plurality of segmenting portions wherein second housing includes a metal frame; Paragraph 46-52 and figure 3-6 of Ghaemi et al.),
wherein the electronic device further comprises a first switch to connect the antenna to a first path (Antenna comprises a switching network 146 that can serve as a first switch wherein this network connects the antennas to transceivers wherein antennas can support 2 transceiver chains serving as 2 paths, one for low band LTE communication and a second for a higher band NR communication, additionally antennas 137a/137c can have an aperture switch that also serves as a first switch; Paragraph 36-48 and figure 1 of Ghaemi et al.)
Ghaemi et al. fails to explicitly disclose a first switch configured to selectively connect the antenna to one of two distinct impedance-matching circuits, a first path providing an impedance match suitable for a middle band or a high band, and a second path providing an impedance match suitable for a low band, such that the first portion of the first metal frame is dynamically reconfigurable to operate across non-overlapping frequency ranges.
However, Lin et al. does disclose a first switch configured to selectively connect the antenna to one of two distinct impedance-matching circuits, a first path providing an impedance match suitable for a middle band or a high band, and a second path providing an impedance match suitable for a low band, such that the first portion of the first metal frame is dynamically reconfigurable to operate across non-overlapping frequency ranges (In figure 2, first antenna 101 comprises a first switch SP4T2 which can be connected to 4 elements X1-X4 and said switch provides 4 paths for the antenna wherein said paths use an impedance matching circuit like M2, which is distinct from an impedance matching circuit like M1 of another antenna, wherein such that the radiator 1012 of antenna 101 can be set to different paths to change the electrical length of the antenna such that said first antenna 101 can operate in multiple frequency bands like 2g, 3g, 4g which includes non-overlapping low bands and mid/high bands with 101 being can be configured to operate at these bands across at least 2 paths and each path can provide an impedance match through the impedance matching circuit M2; Pg. 4-9 and figure 2-8 of Lin et al.).
Therefore, it would have been obvious before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art modify the antenna as taught by Ghaemi et al. to have a first switch configured to selectively connect the antenna to one of two distinct impedance-matching circuits, a first path providing an impedance match suitable for a middle band or a high band, and a second path providing an impedance match suitable for a low band, such that the first portion of the first metal frame is dynamically reconfigurable to operate across non-overlapping frequency ranges as taught by Lin et al. to select the correct operating frequency and provide an impedance match for minimal energy loss and improved quality of signals (Pg. 4 of Lin et al.).
Examiner’s note - Regarding the recitation that an element is “configured to” perform a function, it is the position of the office that such limitations are not positive structural limitations, and thus, only require the ability to so perform. In this case the prior art applied herein is construed as at least possessing such ability. When the structure recited in the reference is substantially identical to that of the claims, claimed properties or functions are presumed to be inherent. The Courts have held that it is well settled that where there is a reason to believe that a functional characteristic would be inherent in the prior art, the burden of proof then shifts to the applicant to provide objective evidence to the contrary. See In re Schreiber, 128 F.3d at 1478, 44 USPQ2d at 1478, 44 USPQ2d at 1432 (Fed. Cir. 1997) (see MPEP § 2112.01, I.).
PNG
media_image1.png
605
332
media_image1.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image2.png
671
573
media_image2.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image3.png
633
993
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Regarding Claim 12, Ghaemi et al. further discloses a second switch configured to electrically connect and/or isolate the first portion of the first metal frame and a second portion of the first metal frame which are physically separated (Aperture switch 612 can serve as a second switch and is configured such that it can electrically connect antennas 137b and 137d when it is closed and to disconnect the antennas 137b and 137d when it is open; Paragraph 51-52 and figure 6 of Ghaemi et al.), wherein the antenna is formed by a portion of the first metal frame or by a portion of the first metal frame and a portion of the second metal frame (Antennas 137b and 137d can operate independently as their own antennas thus being from just a one portion or be coupled to each other to operate dependently to form an antenna that is formed by a first and second portion; Paragraph 45-52 and figure 6 of Ghaemi et al.).
Examiner’s note - Regarding the recitation that an element is “configured to” perform a function, it is the position of the office that such limitations are not positive structural limitations, and thus, only require the ability to so perform. In this case the prior art applied herein is construed as at least possessing such ability. When the structure recited in the reference is substantially identical to that of the claims, claimed properties or functions are presumed to be inherent. The Courts have held that it is well settled that where there is a reason to believe that a functional characteristic would be inherent in the prior art, the burden of proof then shifts to the applicant to provide objective evidence to the contrary. See In re Schreiber, 128 F.3d at 1478, 44 USPQ2d at 1478, 44 USPQ2d at 1432 (Fed. Cir. 1997) (see MPEP § 2112.01, I.).
PNG
media_image4.png
727
576
media_image4.png
Greyscale
Regarding Claim 19, Ghaemi et al. further discloses wherein another antenna is formed by a portion of the first housing other than the first portion of the first metal frame (Fifth and Sixth antennas may be formed in locations like 205 and 206 which would be different portions of the housing from antennas 137a-d; Paragraph 45 and figure 2a-2b of Ghaemi et al.)
Ghaemi et al. fails to explicitly disclose wherein another antenna is formed by a portion of the first housing other than the first portion of the first metal frame to receive a new radio (NR) signal and to receive a long term evolution (LTE) secondary signal.
However, Lin et al. does disclose wherein another antenna is formed by a portion of the first housing other than the first portion of the first metal frame to receive a new radio (NR) signal and to receive a long term evolution (LTE) secondary signal (Electronic device includes a first/second portions of the frame of the housing form antennas like 101/112 and other portions of the housing can be used to form different antennas like 107-117 which can be designed to transmit and receive in LTE as well as 5G which includes NR signals as well as antennas being WIFI antennas operating in 2.4ghz to 2.5ghz which also can include LTE and NR signals; Pg. 8-9 as well as figure 8-9 of Lin et al.).
Therefore, it would have been obvious before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art modify the antenna as taught by Ghaemi et al. to have another antenna be formed by a portion of the first housing other than the first portion of the first metal frame to receive a new radio (NR) signal and to receive a long term evolution (LTE) secondary signal as taught by Lin et al. to allow operation in multiple different frequency bands.
Regarding Claim 20, Ghaemi et al. further discloses wherein another antenna is formed by a portion of the first housing other than the first portion of the first metal frame (Fifth and Sixth antennas may be formed in locations like 205 and 206 which would be different portions of the housing from antennas 137a-d; Paragraph 45 and figure 2a-2b of Ghaemi et al.)
Ghaemi et al. fails to explicitly disclose wherein another antenna is formed by a portion of the first housing other than the first portions of the first metal frame to transmit a long term evolution (LTE) signal and to receive the LTE signal.
However, Lin et al. does disclose wherein another antenna is formed by a portion of the first housing other than the first portion of the first metal frame to transmit a long term evolution (LTE) signal and to receive the LTE signal (Electronic device includes a first/second portions of the frame of the housing form antennas like 101/112 and other portions of the housing can be used to form different antennas like 107-117 which can be designed to transmit and receive in LTE being WIFI antennas operating in 2.4ghz to 2.5ghz which also can include LTE; Pg. 8-9 as well as figure 8-9 of Lin et al.).
Therefore, it would have been obvious before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art modify the antenna as taught by Ghaemi et al. to have another antenna is formed by a portion of the first housing other than the first portion of the first metal frame to transmit a long term evolution (LTE) signal and to receive the LTE signal as taught by Lin et al. to allow operation in multiple different frequency bands.
Claim(s) 13-16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ghaemi et al. (IDS Reference US 11115511 B1) in view of Lin et al. (CN 209860131 U) and Kim et al. (US 9952622 B2).
Regarding Claim 13, Ghaemi et al. does disclose wherein the first metal frame and the second metal frame are electrically connected by at least a portion of the hinge structure (Housings 103a and 103b are connected by a grounding path which can include at least a portion of the hinge 908a or 908b; Paragraph 55 and figure 9 of Ghaemi et al.).
Ghaemi et al. and Lin et al. fail to explicitly disclose wherein the second portion of the first metal frame and a first portion of the second metal frame are electrically connected by at least a portion of the hinge structure.
However, Kim et al. does disclose wherein the second portion of the first metal frame and a first portion of the second metal frame are electrically connected by at least a portion of the hinge structure (A bezel 410 serves as a first housing frame wherein a first portion of it 41-3 and a second portion can be either 41-1a or 41-2a wherein these portions are connected to a first portion 42-4 of the second housing frame 420 through a portion of the hinge structure 43 wherein portion 41-3, 41-1a, and 41-2a serves as part of an antenna: Paragraph 188-196 and figure 4a of Kim et al.).
Therefore, it would have been obvious before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art modify the antenna as taught by Ghaemi et al. and Lin et al. to have the second portion of the first metal frame and a first portion of the second metal frame are electrically connected by at least a portion of the hinge structure as taught by Kim et al. so the second portion that is functioning as part of an antenna can electrically connect to a portion of the second housing to obtain a desired or improved radiation performance (Paragraph 210 of Kim et al.).
PNG
media_image5.png
578
792
media_image5.png
Greyscale
Regarding Claim 14, Ghaemi et al. further discloses wherein the switch is configured to be turned on or off under control of at least one processor, comprising processing circuitry, disposed on the printed circuit board (Aperture controller is designed to turn the switch on and off and is disposed on the PCB wherein controller units can comprise process/processing circuity to accomplish this; Paragraph 33-42 and 51 as well as figure 1 and 3-6 of Ghaemi et al.) and wherein an electrical length of the antenna is configured to be adjusted by turning the second switch on or off (Depending on the switch state will determine whether the antenna is comprised of only one portion or both portions of 137b/137d and thus the electrical length will be different depending on the switch state; Paragraph 51-52 and figure 6 of Ghaemi et al.).
Examiner’s note - Regarding the recitation that an element is “configured to” perform a function, it is the position of the office that such limitations are not positive structural limitations, and thus, only require the ability to so perform. In this case the prior art applied herein is construed as at least possessing such ability. When the structure recited in the reference is substantially identical to that of the claims, claimed properties or functions are presumed to be inherent. The Courts have held that it is well settled that where there is a reason to believe that a functional characteristic would be inherent in the prior art, the burden of proof then shifts to the applicant to provide objective evidence to the contrary. See In re Schreiber, 128 F.3d at 1478, 44 USPQ2d at 1478, 44 USPQ2d at 1432 (Fed. Cir. 1997) (see MPEP § 2112.01, I.).
Regarding Claim 15, Ghaemi et al. further discloses wherein the first switch is configured to connect the antenna to the first path (First switch in the form of switching network 146 can connect an antenna to a first path to the transceiver; Paragraph 36-48 and figure 1 of Ghaemi et al.), and wherein based on the switch being turned off, only the first portion of the first metal frame is configured to operate as the antenna (When the switch is open/off, the antenna portions 137b and 137d are disconnected from each other such that they can operate independently wherein one of these independently operating portions like 137b would be serving as the antenna; Paragraph 52-68 and figure 6 and 12 of Ghaemi et al.).
Examiner’s note - Regarding the recitation that an element is “configured to” perform a function, it is the position of the office that such limitations are not positive structural limitations, and thus, only require the ability to so perform. In this case the prior art applied herein is construed as at least possessing such ability. When the structure recited in the reference is substantially identical to that of the claims, claimed properties or functions are presumed to be inherent. The Courts have held that it is well settled that where there is a reason to believe that a functional characteristic would be inherent in the prior art, the burden of proof then shifts to the applicant to provide objective evidence to the contrary. See In re Schreiber, 128 F.3d at 1478, 44 USPQ2d at 1478, 44 USPQ2d at 1432 (Fed. Cir. 1997) (see MPEP § 2112.01, I.).
Regarding Claim 16, Ghaemi et al. further discloses wherein the antenna is configured to be used for LTE carrier aggregation (CA) (Antennas 137a-137d can be designed to support LTE/low band carrier aggregation (CA); Paragraph 47-48 of Ghaemi et al.).
Examiner’s note - Regarding the recitation that an element is “configured to” perform a function, it is the position of the office that such limitations are not positive structural limitations, and thus, only require the ability to so perform. In this case the prior art applied herein is construed as at least possessing such ability. When the structure recited in the reference is substantially identical to that of the claims, claimed properties or functions are presumed to be inherent. The Courts have held that it is well settled that where there is a reason to believe that a functional characteristic would be inherent in the prior art, the burden of proof then shifts to the applicant to provide objective evidence to the contrary. See In re Schreiber, 128 F.3d at 1478, 44 USPQ2d at 1478, 44 USPQ2d at 1432 (Fed. Cir. 1997) (see MPEP § 2112.01, I.).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 1-4 and 7-10 are allowed.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: Patentability exists, at least in part, with the claimed features of “wherein based on the switch being turned on, the first portion of the first metal frame, the second portion of the first metal frame, the hinge structure, and a first portion of the second metal frame are electrically connected to operate as the antenna.” as recited in claim 1.
Ghaemi et al., Lin et al., and Kim et al. are cited as teaching some of the elements of the claimed invention including a first and second housing, a PCB, a hinge structure, a wireless communication circuit, a first and second metal frames, plurality of portions and segmenting regions, and a first and second switch.
However, the prior art, when taken alone, or, in combination, cannot be construed as reasonably teaching or suggesting all of the elements of the claimed invention as arranged, disposed, or provided in the manner as claimed by the Applicant.
Claims 2-4 and 7-10 depend form claim 1 and as such are allowable for the reasons stated above.
Claims 17-18 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.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter. Patentability exists, at least in part, with the claimed features of “wherein based on the switch being turned on, the first portion of the first metal frame, the second portion of the first metal frame, the hinge structure, and a first portion of the second metal frame are electrically connected to operate as the antenna.” as recited in claims 17.
Ghaemi et al., Lin et al., and Kim et al. are cited as teaching some of the elements of the claimed invention including a first and second housing, a PCB, a hinge structure, a wireless communication circuit, a first and second metal frames, plurality of portions and segmenting regions, and a first and second switch.
However, the prior art, when taken alone, or, in combination, cannot be construed as reasonably teaching or suggesting all of the elements of the claimed invention as arranged, disposed, or provided in the manner as claimed by the Applicant.
Claim 17-19 will also only be allowable if rewritten to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 2nd paragraph, set forth in this Office action and to include all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Response to Arguments
“As discussed during the interview, Ghaemi discloses segmented frames and antenna switches, but lacks a switchable connection between frame portions; and a switch routing a frame-portion antenna between different band-specific impedance-matching paths. The Office Action contends that Lin describes these features and concludes that it would have been obvious to modify Ghaemi in view of Lin.
Applicant respectfully disagrees. Lin describes a first antenna 101 including a radiator 1012, RF source 1011, and switch 1013 for tuning frequency. A metal piece 201 in the second body, grounded through switch 202, serves to suppress clutter signals. Additional antennas (e.g., 106, 107, 112, 116, 117, etc.) formed by other frame slots or metal pieces can be used for Wi-Fi, GPS, LTE, or 5G . Switches such as SP4T switches, capacitors, and inductors tune antenna impedance or length, or filter clutter. In sum, Lin discloses multiple antennas implemented in various frame portions, with tuning or clutter-suppression switches.
Claim 11 requires an antenna (the first metal frame portion) and a switch configured to re-route that antenna between two impedance-matched paths for distinct band groups (mid/high vs. low). Lin, however, discloses separate antennas in different housing portions (e.g., LTE vs. Wi-Fi vs. GPS vs. 5G). These are different radiators, not the same frame portion switched between two impedance-matched feed paths. Lin also discloses switches for tuning or filtering, e.g., clutter suppression or selecting between capacitors/inductors to slightly adjust the electrical length of a radiator. Lin does not disclose or suggest using a single switch to toggle a frame antenna between entirely distinct band-optimized impedance-matching paths. Lin's disclosure (in respect of claim 9) that "other portions of the housing can be used to form different antennas...to transmit and receive LTE or Wi-Fi signals" merely describes additional antennas. Lin does not teach Applicant's claimed dual-path, band-dependent impedance matching of the same antenna.”
Applicant's arguments filed on December 04th 2025 in regards to claims 11 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. Examiner respectfully disagrees that Ghaemi et al. in view of Lin et al. fails to disclose, as best understood under the 112b interpretation, “a first switch configured to selectively connect the antenna to one of two distinct impedance-matching circuits, a first path providing an impedance match suitable for a middle band or a high band, and a second path providing an impedance match suitable for a low band, such that the first portion of the first metal frame is dynamically reconfigurable to operate across non-overlapping frequency ranges.”
Regarding claim 1, the examiner notes that Lin et al. does discloses a first antenna 101 with a radiator 1012, wherein this singular antenna can be operated at multiple frequency bands like 3G, 4G, and 5G (Pg. 8 of Lin et al.). This is done through the use of a SP4T switch which allows the antenna to be connected to multiple paths depending on the frequency of operation required (Pg. 4-6 of Lin et al.). As such the antenna can be toggled between different band optimized paths. Furthermore these paths are connected to an impedance matching circuit M2 which reduces the standing wave for reduction in energy loss which means these paths are being impedance matched. Additionally, the operating frequency of the antenna is changed by selecting different paths which change the electrical length of the radiator, as noted by Lin et al. and the applicant, wherein this changing of length would make the radiator dynamically reconfigurable. Finally, the examiner notes, that said claim uses “configured to” language which is inherently broader in nature and only requires the components and the ability to do so. Since Lin et al. discloses a radiator capable of operating at multiple frequencies, multiple paths, a switch to select paths, and an impedance matching circuit. Thus, even if Lin et al. did not explicitly teach switching paths to select different frequencies or impedance matching this paths, it could easily be configured to do so.
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. 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.
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
US 20200136231 A1 (LEE; Jonghyuck et al.) discloses an antenna with two housing structures wherein each housing includes metal frames comprising portions serving as antennas wherein a first frame with two portions is electrically connected to an hinge.
US 20210318720 A1 (Lin; Shijie et al.) discloses a folding phone antenna wherein two the device comprises two housings with each housing comprising a frame with each frame having a radiating portions.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to GURBIR SINGH whose telephone number is (703)756-4637. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Thursday 8 a.m. - 5 p.m. 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, Dameon E 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.
/DAMEON E LEVI/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2845
/GURBIR SINGH/Examiner, Art Unit 2845