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 § 102
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.
Claim 1 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Fowler et al (US 5,438,697), hereinafter Fowler.
Regarding claim 1, Fowler (Figures 1 and 5) teaches an antenna device comprising:
an exterior body (12 and 52) forming an accommodation space;
a substrate 24 accommodated in the accommodation space and held by the exterior body;
a patch antenna 22 accommodated in the accommodation space and disposed on the substrate; and
an elastic body (compressible resilient layer, col 7 lines 47-52) disposed between the exterior body and the patch antenna, wherein
the exterior body includes a case 12 located on a front surface side of the patch antenna and a base 52 located on a back surface side of the patch antenna, and
the elastic body is sandwiched between the case and the base.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 2-17 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:
Regarding claim 2, Fowler fails to specifically teach that at least part of the elastic body contacts the exterior body and the patch antenna.
Claims 3 and 4 would have been found allowable for at least the reason for depending, either directly or indirectly, on claim 2.
Regarding claim 5, Fowler fails to specifically teach that at least part of the elastic body is disposed between the exterior body and side surfaces of the patch antenna.
Claims 9-11 and 13 would have been found allowable for at least the reason for depending, either directly or indirectly, on claim 5.
Regarding claim 6, Fowler fails to specifically teach that at least part of the elastic body is disposed between the exterior body and the front surface of the patch antenna.
Claims 7, 8 and 16 would have been found allowable for at least the reason for depending, either directly or indirectly, on claim 6.
Regarding claim 12, Fowler fails to specifically teach that the exterior body includes a first guide portion, and the elastic body includes a second guide portion to guide the first guide portion.
Claim 15 would have been found allowable for at least the reason for depending on claim 12.
Regarding claim 14, Fowler fails to specifically teach that the patch antenna includes a cable electrically connected thereto, and the elastic body has a grommet through which the cable is inserted.
Regarding claim 17, Fowler fails to further teach that the elastic body has a holding portion, and the holding portion holds the substrate.
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 HOANG V NGUYEN whose telephone number is (571)272-1825. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 8am-5pm.
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) 270-7983. 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.
/HOANG V NGUYEN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2845