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 .
Receipt is acknowledged of amendments/arguments filed on 06/08/2026.
Claims 1-20 are presented for examination.
This application is a CON of 17/968,132 filed on 10/18/2022 now PAT 12,050,952 which is a CON of 17/390,047 filed on 07/30/2021 now PAT 11,551,050.
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
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.
Claim(s) 14-15 and 19-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Kato et al. (US 2013/0050035).
Re Claim 14 and 19-20: Kato et al. teaches communication terminal and card antenna module, which includes an antenna {herein card antenna module 101} for coupling with an external reader {herein communication terminal 201} (see ¶ 23+) , and at least one passive component for storing electrical energy, comprising: a chip capacitor disposed within a perimeter of the antenna (¶ 30+).
Re Claim 19: Kato et al. teaches a wireless tag {the card antenna module 101 communicates with an RFID tag attached to an article} (33+).
Re Claim 20: Kato et al. teaches a SIM card {a SIM card is a type of smart card specifically designed for mobile telecommunications} (see fig.# 7; 50+).
Re Claim 15:Kato et al. teaches a device, further comprising a chip module coupling antenna {herein the card module antenna 101 includes a semiconductor IC chip} for coupling with a chip module antenna of the electronically readable article (30+).
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.
Claim(s) 18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kato et al. (US 2013/0050035) in view of Waumans et al. (CN 102656021 A).
The teachings of Kato et al. have been discussed above. Kato et al. also teaches a card antenna module that is used for, for example, an RFID system, and is useful as an article management system or the like (33+, 52+).
Kato et al. fails to specifically teach a plurality of plastic sheets, wherein the inlay is arranged between the plastic sheets.
Waumans et al. (CN 102656021 A) teaches security document having a security feature in edge, which includes a plurality of plastic sheets, wherein the inlay is arranged between the plastic sheets (see paragraph 32+).
In view of Waumans et al.’s teachings, it would have been obvious to an artisan of ordinary skill before the filing date of the claimed invention to employ into the teachings of Kato et al. a plurality of plastic sheets, wherein the inlay is arranged between the plastic sheets so as to attach said chip module to one of a passport sheet for wireless transmission of secure information.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 1-13 are allowed.
Claims 16-17 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: the prior art of record fails to specifically teach a metal layer having an opening, and an inlay arranged in the opening, the inlay comprising: an antenna, and a chip capacitor disposed within a perimeter of the antenna. These limitations in conjunction with other limitations in the claimed invention were not shown by the prior art of record.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1-20 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Pueschner et al. (US 2014/0042230) teaches chip card module with separate antenna and chip card inlay using same.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to EDWYN LABAZE whose telephone number is (571)272-2395. The examiner can normally be reached 8:30AM-5:00PM.
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, Mr. STEVE PAIK can be reached at 571-272-2404. 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.
/EDWYN LABAZE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2876
Prosecution Insights