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 Amendment
The amendment filed on 01/27/2026 has been entered. Claims 1-3, 7 and 11-14 are currently pending with claims 12-14 being withdrawn. Applicant’s amendments have overcome the drawing objections, specification objections, and 35 USC 112 rejections previously set forth in the Non-Final Office Action mailed 10/28/2025.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim 1 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on the combination of references applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
Applicant argued that “Firstly, regarding the Examiner's citation of Russell (D3) at paragraph [0059] to assert that the use of copper or tin plating is obvious because D3 discloses an isolation box made of "solderable material (e.g., tin plated steel, brass, beryllium copper, etc.)," Applicant respectfully disagrees.
Applicant respectfully submits that the Examiner confuses sheet metal fabrication with PCB manufacturing. Paragraph [0059] of D3 explicitly states that "the isolation box 116 may be made of solderable material (e.g., tin plated steel, brass, beryllium copper, etc.) that is stamped to provide the overall shape, openings 160, etc. Portions of the stamped material may then be formed (e.g., bent, folded, deformed, etc.) to provide the SMT tabs 136 ..." In contrast, the present invention specifies a Printed Circuit Board. The amended claims require the isolating bar to be made of a Printed Circuit Board.
The "tin plated steel" in D3 refers to bulk metal sheets coated with tin for corrosion resistance and to ensure the solderability of the metal sheet itself. A person of ordinary skill in the art would not look to the stamped sheet metal materials of D3 for suggestions regarding the optional surface treatment of the PCB isolating bar of Wang (D1). While D1 mentions the isolating bar may be a PCB, the "tin plated steel" or "brass" of D3 is incompatible with PCB substrates. One cannot manufacture a PCB out of solid brass or tin plated steel.
In summary, the combination of D1 and D3 fails to teach an isolating bar that is both made of a Printed Circuit Board and subjected to immersion tin treatment.
Secondly, regarding the Examiner's citation of Muramatsu (D5) to teach that a pin height greater than a depth of the slot is obvious for the purpose of preventing disconnection, Applicant respectfully points out that the Examiner has overlooked the functional purpose of the protrusion in the present invention as it relates to the through-hole reflow (THR) soldering process.
The claims require the pin to be exposed ("the pin has a height greater than a depth of the slot") specifically within the context of an assembly "based on a through-hole reflow soldering process." In a THR process, the pin must protrude to allow solder paste (printed on the pads) to wick along the pin and form a proper solder fillet on the top side (or protruding side) during the reflow oven cycle.
The solution in D5 is purely mechanical. D5 describes an "elastically deformable" "power supply spring pin." Its protrusion through the circuit board is designed "so that a hook portion 14j projected outward from the power supply/connection hole 22 gets stuck on a rear surface of the circuit board" The protrusion in D5 is for mechanical latching or ensuring pressure contact.
Furthermore, D5 explicitly teaches avoiding brazing/soldering in favor of mechanical contact (repeatedly emphasizing in its SUMMARY that the objective is to be "mechanically connected in secure...without using a brazing"). It teaches away from the claimed process. It is improper to modify the soldering references (Li/Wang) with a reference (D5) that relies on mechanical spring force when the purpose of the protrusion (mechanical latching) is entirely distinct from the claimed purpose (THR solder fillet formation).
Finally, the Examiner's combination of the prior art is piecemeal and inappropriate. Wang (D1) provides a basic scheme; Li (D2) provides general reflow soldering; Russell (D3) provides sheet metal materials (not PCB surface treatments); and Muramatsu (D5) provides mechanical latching (not solder fillets).
Neither alone nor in combination do these references teach an isolating bar whose surface is cladded with copper and subjected to immersion tin treatment designed to facilitate through-hole reflow soldering, nor do they teach the resulting feed assembly for an antenna comprising said isolating bar and a feed power dividing plate.”
The arguments are moot because claims 1 and 11 are now being rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wang et al, CN-112688075-A in view of Li et al, CN-110767990-A and further in view of Smith et al, US-20090034222-A1 as explained below.
Moreover, Applicant stated that “The claims require the pin to be exposed ("the pin has a height greater than a depth of the slot") specifically within the context of an assembly "based on a through-hole reflow soldering process. In a THR process, the pin must protrude to allow solder paste (printed on the pads) to wick along the pin and form a proper solder fillet on the top side (or protruding side) during the reflow oven cycle”. Therefore, Li reference teach the pins of the PCB antenna 2 inserted in the slot 101, and the PCB antenna 2 being welded to the plate 1 through the pads based on a through-hole reflow soldering process (page 8, last para: after the semi-finished product of the PCB antenna placed in the reflow furnace to reflow soldering treatment, to obtain the finished product of PCB antenna), it is implied that the pins of Li should also protrude from the plate and teaches the limitation “the pin has a height greater than a depth of the slot so that the pin is exposed from a surface of the feed power dividing plate”.
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.
Claims 1-3, 7 and 11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wang et al, CN-112688075-A (hereinafter Wang) in view of Li et a, CN-110767990-A (hereinafter Li), and further in view of Smith et al, US-20090034222-A1 (hereinafter Smith).
Regarding claim 1, Wang discloses the following:
a feed assembly for an antenna, comprising:
a feed power dividing plate (300, figs. 1-5) provided with a slot (310),
an isolating bar (110) provided with a pin (140) configured to be inserted into the slot (page 5, para 6: the pin 140 inserted into the slot 310), the isolating bar being made of a Printed Circuit Board (page 5, para 2), the isolating bar being welded to the feed power dividing plate (page 5, para 6: it also can further adopt the form of welding the connection bump 140 of the isolation bar 110 connected with the inner wall of the slot 310 of the feed power diving plate 300), wherein the slot has a greater width than the thickness isolating bar (page 5, para 6: the pin 140 of the isolating bar 110 is inserted into the slot 310, it is implied that the width of the slot 310 is greater than the thickness of the pin 140/the isolating bar 110 so that the pin of the isolating bar can fit inside the slot 310), the slot has a greater length than a length of the pin (page 5, para 6: the pin 140 is inserted into the slot 310, it is implied that the slot 310 has a greater length than the length of the pin 140 so that the pin 140 can fit inside the slot).
Wang does not disclose wherein an inner wall of the slot is metallized, and pads are arranged on two sides of the slot; a surface of the isolating bar being cladded with copper and subjected to immersion tin treatment, the isolating bar being welded to the feed power dividing plate through the pads based on a through-hole reflow soldering process, the pin has a height greater than a depth of the slot so that the pin is exposed from a surface of the feed power dividing plate.
Li suggests wherein an inner wall of the slot is metallized (fig. 3, page 8, para 2: each positioning hole 101 of the hole side wall are filled with the metal layer), and pads (102, 103) are arranged on two sides of the slot, the printed circuit board being welded to the plate (page 7, para 4: PCB antenna 2 is welded on the plate 1) through the pads based on a through-hole reflow soldering process (page 8, last para: after the semi-finished product of the PCB antenna placed in the reflow furnace to reflow soldering treatment, to obtain the finished product of PCB antenna).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to replace the slot of the feed power diving plate taught in Wang with the metallized slot with pads and use the through-hole reflow soldering process as suggested in Li as claimed for the purpose of increasing the welding strength and reliability between the components to ensure the antenna performance (Li, Abstract).
The combination of Wang and Li does not disclose a surface of the isolating bar being cladded with copper and subjected to immersion tin treatment, the pin has a height greater than a depth of the slot so that the pin is exposed from a surface of the feed power dividing plate.
Smith suggests a surface of the printed circuit board being cladded with copper and subjected to immersion tin treatment (para 0016]), the pin (24, fig. 3) has a height greater than a depth of the slot (22) so that the pin is exposed from a surface of the plate (12).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to clad the surface of the PCB taught in Wang and Li with copper and immerse in tin treatment as suggested in Smith for the purpose of improving the connection between the isolation bar and the feed power dividing plate in order to maintain the antenna’s performance under vibration or movements.
Examiner’s Note regarding the “through-hole reflow soldering process” – “[E]ven though product-by-process claims are limited by and defined by the process, determination of patentability is based on the product itself. The patentability of a product does not depend on its method of production. If the product in the product-by-process claim is the same as or obvious from a product of the prior art, the claim is unpatentable even though the prior product was made by a different process. "In re Thorpe, 777 F.2d 695, 698, 227 USPQ 964, 966 (Fed. Cir. 1985)”. (See MPEP 2113, Section I).
Regarding claim 2, Wang discloses wherein the isolating bar (110, fig. 2) is perpendicularly welded to the feed power dividing plate (300).
Regarding claim 3, Wang does not disclose wherein the pads are arranged on two sides in a length direction of the slot.
Li disclose wherein the pads (102, 103, fig. 3) are arranged on two sides in a length direction of the slot (101).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to arrange the pads on two sides as suggested in Li of the slot taught in Wang as claimed for the purpose of applying the through-hole reflow soldering process in welding the isolating bar to the slot in order to increase the welding strength and reliability between the components to ensure the antenna performance (Li, Abstract).
Regarding claim 7, the combination of Wang and Li does not disclose wherein the inner wall of the slot is provided with a copper layer.
Smith suggests wherein the inner wall of the slot (22) is provided with a copper layer (para [0016]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide the slot taught in Wang and Li with a copper layer as suggested in Smith for the purpose of connecting the pin of the isolating bar to the slot in order to improve the connection and maintain the antenna’s performance.
Regarding claim 11, Wang discloses the following:
an electronic device, comprising an antenna structure a feed assembly for an antenna, the antenna structure a feed assembly comprising:
a feed power dividing plate (300, figs. 1-5) provided with a slot (310),
an isolating bar (110) provided with a pin (140) configured to be inserted into the slot (page 5, para 6: the pin 140 inserted into the slot 310), the isolating bar being made of a Printed Circuit Board (page 5, para 2), the isolating bar being welded to the feed power dividing plate (page 5, para 6: it also can further adopt the form of welding the connection bump 140 of the isolation bar 110 connected with the inner wall of the slot 310 of the feed power diving plate 300), wherein the slot has a greater width than the thickness isolating bar (page 5, para 6: the pin 140 of the isolating bar 110 is inserted into the slot 310, it is implied that the width of the slot 310 is greater than the thickness of the pin 140/the isolating bar 110 so that the pin of the isolating bar can fit inside the slot 310), the slot has a greater length than a length of the pin (page 5, para 6: the pin 140 is inserted into the slot 310, it is implied that the slot 310 has a greater length than the length of the pin 140 so that the pin 140 can fit inside the slot).
Wang does not disclose wherein an inner wall of the slot is metallized, and pads are arranged on two sides of the slot; a surface of the isolating bar being cladded with copper and subjected to immersion tin treatment, the isolating bar being welded to the feed power dividing plate through the pads based on a through-hole reflow soldering process, the pin has a height greater than a depth of the slot so that the pin is exposed from a surface of the feed power dividing plate.
Li suggests wherein an inner wall of the slot is metallized (fig. 3, page 8, para 2: each positioning hole 101 of the hole side wall are filled with the metal layer), and pads (102, 103) are arranged on two sides of the slot, the printed circuit board being welded to the plate (page 7, para 4: PCB antenna 2 is welded on the plate 1) through the pads based on a through-hole reflow soldering process (page 8, last para: after the semi-finished product of the PCB antenna placed in the reflow furnace to reflow soldering treatment, to obtain the finished product of PCB antenna).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to replace the slot of the feed power diving plate taught in Wang with the metallized slot with pads and use the through-hole reflow soldering process as suggested in Li as claimed for the purpose of increasing the welding strength and reliability between the components to ensure the antenna performance (Li, Abstract).
The combination of Wang and Li does not disclose a surface of the isolating bar being cladded with copper and subjected to immersion tin treatment, the pin has a height greater than a depth of the slot so that the pin is exposed from a surface of the feed power dividing plate.
Smith suggests a surface of the printed circuit board being cladded with copper and subjected to immersion tin treatment (para 0016]), the pin (24, fig. 3) has a height greater than a depth of the slot (22) so that the pin is exposed from a surface of the plate (12).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to clad the surface of the PCB taught in Wang and Li with copper and immerse in tin treatment as suggested in Smith for the purpose of improving the connection between the isolation bar and the feed power dividing plate in order to maintain the antenna’s performance under vibration or movements.
Examiner’s Note regarding the “through-hole reflow soldering process” – “[E]ven though product-by-process claims are limited by and defined by the process, determination of patentability is based on the product itself. The patentability of a product does not depend on its method of production. If the product in the product-by-process claim is the same as or obvious from a product of the prior art, the claim is unpatentable even though the prior product was made by a different process. "In re Thorpe, 777 F.2d 695, 698, 227 USPQ 964, 966 (Fed. Cir. 1985)”. (See MPEP 2113, Section I).
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 ANH N HO whose telephone number is (571)272-4657. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8:00-5:00.
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 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
/ANH HO/Examiner, Art Unit 2845
Prosecution Insights