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 .
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 1-10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ramzan (Pub. No.: 2024/0403574 A1) in view of Fu (Pub. No.: 2010/0320275 A1)
1) In regard to claim 1, Ramzan discloses an RFID inlay (fig. 3: 300) comprising:
a substrate (fig. 3: 310) defined by a first edge and a second edge opposing the first edge (fig. 3 shows the substrate has a first edge and a second edge); and
an antenna (fig. 3: 320) disposed on the substrate (fig. 3 shows the antenna is disposed on the substrate), wherein the antenna includes a loop (¶0030).
Ramzan does not explicitly disclose the antenna includes a first antenna pattern extending from the loop, wherein the loop is disposed adjacent to the first edge, and wherein the first antenna pattern is disposed between the loop and the second edge and is asymmetrical relative to the loop.
However, Fu discloses it is known for an antenna (fig. 3) to include a first antenna pattern extending from a loop (fig. 3 shows the triangle antenna extending from the loop antenna), wherein the loop is disposed adjacent to a first edge (fig. 3 shows the loop is adjacent to a first edge), and wherein the first antenna pattern is disposed between the loop and a second edge and is asymmetrical relative to the loop (fig. 3 shows the first pattern is disposed between the loop and a second edge and is asymmetrical relative to the loop).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the claimed invention was filed to allow an RFID inlay of Ramzan to include an antenna with a loop and a first pattern, as taught by Fu.
One skilled in the art would be motivated to modify Ramzan as described above in order to provide an antenna which has a high antenna gain, strong reflectivity and high conductivity, as taught by Fu (¶0002).
2) In regard to claim 2 (dependent on claim 1), Ramzan and Fu further disclose the RFID inlay of claim 1.
Ramzan and Fu do not explicitly disclose the first antenna pattern is defined by a plurality of first connection lines and a plurality of second connections lines, wherein the plurality of second connection lines are perpendicular to the first connection lines, wherein the first connection lines and the second connection lines respectively define a plurality of rectangles.
However, official notice is taken by the examiner that both the concept and advantage is known for an RFID inlay to utilize an antenna pattern which is defined by a plurality of first connection lines and a plurality of second connections lines, wherein the plurality of second connection lines are perpendicular to the first connection lines, wherein the first connection lines and the second connection lines respectively define a plurality of rectangles.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the claimed invention was filed to design the antenna pattern of Ramzan to be defined by a plurality of connection lines.
One skilled in the art would be motivated to modify Ramzan as described above in order to utilize one of a finite number of antenna design configurations.
3) In regard to claim 3 (dependent on claim 2), Ramzan and Fu further disclose the RFID inlay of claim 2.
Ramzan and Fu do not explicitly disclose the plurality of first connection lines and the plurality of second connection lines define a first row of rectangles.
However, official notice is taken by the examiner that both the concept and advantage is known for an antenna pattern to be defined by a row of rectangles.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the claimed invention was filed to allow the pattern of Ramzan antennas to be a row of rectangles.
One skilled in the art would be motivated to modify Ramzan as described above in order to utilize one of a finite number of antenna design configurations.
4) In regard to claim 4 (dependent on claim 3), Ramzan and Fu further disclose the RFID inlay of claim 3.
Ramzan and Fu do not explicitly disclose the plurality of first connection lines and the plurality of second connection lines define a second row of rectangles, wherein a number of rectangles in the first row of rectangles is different than a number of rectangles in the second row of rectangles.
However, official notice is taken by the examiner that both the concept and advantage is known for an RFID inlay connection lines to be a row of rectangles in a first row is different than a second row.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the claimed invention was filed to allow the RFID inlay of Ramzan antenna pattern to have rectangle configuration.
One skilled in the art would be motivated to modify Ramzan as described above in order to utilize one of a finite number of antenna design configurations.
5) In regard to claim 5 (dependent on claim 4), Ramzan and Fu further disclose the RFID inlay of claim 4.
Ramzan and Fu do not explicitly disclose the first row of rectangles has a different length than the second row of rectangles.
However, official notice is taken by the examiner that both the concept and advantage is known for an RFID inlay antenna pattern to have rectangles of different lengths.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the claimed invention was filed to allow the antennas of Ramzan to have different lengths.
One skilled in the art would be motivated to modify Ramzan as described above in order to utilize one of a finite number of antenna design configurations.
6) In regard to claim 6 (dependent on claim 1), Ramzan and Fu further disclose the RFID inlay of claim 1, wherein the antenna includes a second antenna pattern extending from the loop and disposed between the first edge and the loop, wherein each of the first antenna pattern and the second antenna pattern is asymmetrical relative to the loop (Fu fig. 3).
7) In regard to claim 7 (dependent on claim 1), Ramzan and Fu further disclose the RFID inlay of claim 1.
Ramzan and Fu do not explicitly disclose the first antenna pattern comprises an asymmetric dipole including a solid bar.
However, official notice is taken by the examiner that both the concept and advantage is known for an RFID inlay antenna pattern to comprise an asymmetric dipole including a solid bar.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the claimed invention was filed to allow the RFID inlay antenna of Ramzan to comprise an asymmetric dipole including a soldi bar.
One skilled in the art would be motivated to modify Ramzan as described above in order to utilize one of a finite number of antenna design configurations.
8) In regard to claim 8 (dependent on claim 1), Ramzan and Fu further disclose the RFID inlay of claim 1.
Ramzan and Fu do not explicitly disclose the first antenna pattern is defined by a plurality of first connection lines and a plurality of second connections lines, wherein the plurality of second connection lines are perpendicular to the first connection lines, wherein at least one of the plurality of first connection lines comprises a first thickness, and wherein at least one of the plurality of second connection lines comprises a second thickness, wherein the second thickness is different than the first thickness.
However, official notice is taken by the examiner that both the concept and advantage is known for an RFID inlay to utilize an antenna pattern to be defined by a plurality of first connection lines and a plurality of second connections lines, wherein the plurality of second connection lines are perpendicular to the first connection lines, wherein at least one of the plurality of first connection lines comprises a first thickness, and wherein at least one of the plurality of second connection lines comprises a second thickness, wherein the second thickness is different than the first thickness.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the claimed invention was filed to allow the antenna pattern of Ramzan to have a plurality of connections having different thicknesses.
One skilled in the art would be motivated to modify Ramzan as described above in order to utilize one of a finite number of antenna design configurations.
9) In regard to claim 9 (dependent on claim 1), Ramzan and Fu further disclose the RFID inlay of claim 1, wherein the inlay further comprises an integrated circuit connected to the loop, wherein the loop is configured to provide inductance for the integrated circuit (Ramzan fig. 3: 330 and Fu fig. 3: 2).
10) In regard to claim 10 (dependent on claim 1), Ramzan and Fu further disclose the RFID inlay of claim 1.
Ramzan and Fu do not explicitly disclose the first antenna pattern comprises at least one meander line.
However, official notice is taken by the examiner that both the concept and advantage is known for an antenna pattern to have a meander line.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the claimed invention was filed to allow the antenna pattern of Ramzan to comprise at least one meander line.
One skilled in the art would be motivated to modify Ramzan as described above in order to utilize one of a finite number of antenna design configurations.
Claims 11-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ramzan (Pub. No.: 2024/0403574 A1) in view of Fu (Pub. No.: 2010/0320275 A1) and Finn (Pub. No.: 2021/0073608 A1).
1) In regard to claim 11, Ramzan discloses a label comprising (fig. 3) comprising:
an RFID inlay (fig. 3: 300) with a substrate (fig. 3: 310) including a first edge and a second edge spaced apart from the first edge (fig. 3 shows the substrate has a first edge and a second edge); and
wherein the substrate includes an integrated circuit (fig. 3: 330) and an antenna thereon (fig. 3: 320), wherein the antenna includes a loop (¶0030).
Ramzan does not explicitly disclose an antenna pattern extending from the loop, wherein the antenna pattern is disposed on a side of the loop and asymmetrical relative thereto, a facestock disposed about the RFID inlay and in a stacked arrangement therewith, and the facestock comprises at least one of: an electronic product code, indicia, printed artwork, and information.
However, Fu discloses it is known for an antenna (fig. 3) to include a first antenna pattern extending from a loop (fig. 3 shows the triangle antenna extending from the loop antenna), wherein the loop is disposed adjacent to a first edge (fig. 3 shows the loop is adjacent to a first edge), and wherein the first antenna pattern is disposed between the loop and a second edge and is asymmetrical relative to the loop (fig. 3 shows the first pattern is disposed between the loop and a second edge and is asymmetrical relative to the loop).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the claimed invention was filed to allow an RFID inlay of Ramzan to include an antenna with a loop and a first pattern, as taught by Fu.
One skilled in the art would be motivated to modify Ramzan as described above in order to provide an antenna which has a high antenna gain, strong reflectivity and high conductivity, as taught by Fu (¶0002).
In addition, Finn discloses it has been known for an RFID inlay to include a facestock disposed about the RFID inlay and in a stacked arrangement therewith, and the facestock comprises at least one of: an electronic product code, indicia, printed artwork, and information (Finn fig. 9 and ¶0320-¶0321).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the claimed invention was filed to allow the inlay of Ramzan to include a facestock, as taught by Finn.
One skilled in the art would be motivated to modify Ramzan as described above in order to use the RFID label in applications for consumer purposes.
2) In regard to claim 12 (dependent on claim 11), Ramzan, Fu and Finn further disclose the label of claim 11, wherein the first edge is a leading edge, and the second edge is a rear edge, wherein the label is dimensioned such that the rear edge overlaps the leading edge to define an overlapped portion when the label is applied about a circumference of an item (Finn fig. 9D).
3) In regard to claim 13 (dependent on claim 12), Ramzan, Fu and Finn further disclose the label of claim 12, wherein the at least one of the electronic product code, indicia, printed artwork, and information is not disposed in the overlapped portion (Finn fig. 9).
4) In regard to claim 14 (dependent on claim 11), Ramzan, Fu and Finn further disclose the label of claim 11, wherein the label further comprises a transparent film disposed about the facestock, wherein the film comprises polyethylene terephthalate (Finn fig. 9D: 910-914).
5) In regard to claim 15 (dependent on claim 11), Ramzan, Fu and Finn further disclose the label of claim 11.
Ramzan, Fu and Finn do not explicitly disclose the antenna pattern is defined by a plurality of first connection lines and a plurality of second connections lines, wherein the plurality of second connection lines are perpendicular to the plurality of first connection lines, wherein the plurality of first connection lines and the plurality of second connection lines define a plurality of rectangles.
However, official notice is taken by the examiner that both the concept and advantage is known for an RFID inlay to utilize an antenna pattern which is defined by a plurality of first connection lines and a plurality of second connections lines, wherein the plurality of second connection lines are perpendicular to the first connection lines, wherein the first connection lines and the second connection lines respectively define a plurality of rectangles.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the claimed invention was filed to design the antenna pattern of Ramzan to be defined by a plurality of connection lines.
One skilled in the art would be motivated to modify Ramzan as described above in order to utilize one of a finite number of antenna design configurations.
6) In regard to claim 16, claim 16 is rejected and analyzed with respect to claim 12 and the references applied.
7) In regard to claim 17 (dependent on claim 16), Ramzan, Fu and Finn further disclose the method of claim 16.
Ramzan, Fu and Finn do not explicitly disclose the antenna pattern is defined by a plurality of connection lines disposed asymmetrically relative to the loop, wherein the method further comprises optimizing the read range, frequency response, or resonant frequency of the RFID label by altering at least one of the connection lines.
However, official notice is taken by the examiner that both the concept and advantage is known for an RFID method to have an antenna pattern to be defined by a plurality of connection lines disposed asymmetrically relative to a loop, and to further optimize the read range, frequency response, or resonant frequency of the RFID label by altering at least one of the connection lines.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the claimed invention was filed to allow the method of Ramzan adjust read range, frequency response or resonant frequency of a label by design an antenna patter to be defined by a plurality of connection lines.
One skilled in the art would be motivated to modify Ramzan as described above in order to reduce any interference during the communication phase between an RFID reader and an RFID tag.
8) In regard to claim 18 (dependent on claim 17), Ramzan, Fu and Finn further disclose the method of claim 17.
Ramzan, Fu and Finn do not explicitly disclose the method further comprises determining dielectric properties of the object to which the label will be applied, and optimizing the read range based on the dielectric properties of the object.
However, official notice is taken by the examiner that both the concept and advantage is known for an RFID method to determine dielectric properties of an object to which a label will be applied, and optimizing the read range based on the dielectric properties of the object.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the claimed invention was filed to allow the method of Ramzan optimizing a read range based on dielectric properties of an object.
One skilled in the art would be motivated to modify Ramzan as described above in order to reduce any interference during the communication phase between an RFID reader and an RFID tag.
9) In regard to claim 19 (dependent on claim 17), Ramzan, Fu and Finn further disclose the method of claim 17.
Ramzan, Fu and Finn do not explicitly disclose the at least one of the connection lines is removed via a die cut during a label conversion process.
However, official notice is taken by the examiner that both the concept and advantage is known for an RFID method to have at least one of the connection lines is removed via a die cut during a label conversion process.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the claimed invention was filed to allow the method of Ramzan to remove a die cut during a label conversion process.
One skilled in the art would be motivated to modify Ramzan as described above in order to reduce any interference during the communication phase between an RFID reader and an RFID tag.
10) In regard to claim 20 (dependent on claim 16), Ramzan, Fu and Finn further disclose the method of claim 16.
Ramzan, Fu and Finn do not explicitly disclose the method further comprising identifying a pinch point of the label based on a label applicator to be employed for applying the RFID label, and adjusting a location of the integrated circuit based on the pinch point.
However, official notice is taken by the examiner that both the concept and advantage is known for an RFID method to identify a pinch point of a label based on a label applicator to be employed for applying the RFID label, and adjusting a location of an integrated circuit based on the pinch point.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the claimed invention was filed to allow the method of Ramzan to adjust a location of an integrated circuit based on a pinch point.
One skilled in the art would be motivated to modify Ramzan as described above in order to reduce any interference during the communication phase between an RFID reader and an RFID tag.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CURTIS J KING whose telephone number is (571)270-5160. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri 6:00 - 2:00 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, Quan-Zhen Wang can be reached at 571-272-3114. 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.
/CURTIS J KING/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2685