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 .
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. The following features are not shown:
Claim 7: “the hybrid antenna structure covers a first frequency band, a second frequency band, a third frequency band, a fourth frequency band, and a fifth frequency band.”;
Claim 8: “the first frequency band is from 617MHz to 960MHz, the second frequency band is from 1400MHz to 2000MHz, the third frequency band is from 2000MHz to 2690MHz, the fourth frequency band is from 3300MHz to 5000MHz, and the fifth frequency band is from 5000MHz to 5925MHz.”
Therefore, the above features 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.
Specification
The disclosure is objected to because of the following informalities:
The specification ([0015], line 1) discloses “The ground element 110 is configured to provide a ground voltage VSS.” By definition, a voltage is applied between two points having different electrical potential. The electrical potential across the entire ground element is constant. Therefore, the ground element 110 on its own cannot provide a (ground) voltage. It provides ground potential instead. The same objection applies for all other occasions wherein the term “ground voltage” is used in the same manner.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Objections
Claims 1, 14, 16, and 20 are objected to because of the following informalities:
Claim 1 (line 12) “ground voltage” should be amended to “ground element” (see objection to the specification above);
Claim 14 (line 7) “ground voltage” should be amended to “ground element”;
Claim 16 (line 4) “ground voltage” should be amended to “ground element”;
Claim 20 (lines 3-6) “ground voltage” should be amended to “ground element”.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
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.
Claims 1-20 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 1 (line 2) recites “a ground element, providing a ground voltage”. It is not clear how the ground element provides a ground voltage. As stated above, by definition, a voltage is applied between two points having different electrical potential. The electrical potential across the entire ground element is supposed to be constant. Therefore, the ground element on its own cannot provide a ground voltage. It provides ground potential instead. For examination purposes, this limitation is interpreted as: “a ground element”.
Claims 2-20 inherit the indefiniteness of claim 1 and are subsequently rejected, as well.
Claim 3 (line 3) recites “the second straight line is substantially parallel to the first straight line.” The use of the term “substantially” renders the scope of the claim indefinite. The specification ([0011], lines 6-7) discloses: “The term “substantially” means the value is within an acceptable error range.” However, the acceptable error range is not provided nor defined in any unambiguous terms.
Claim 9 recites “a length of the third radiation element is substantially equal to 0.25 wavelength of the first frequency band.” The use of the term “substantially” renders the scope of the claim indefinite. The specification ([0011], lines 6-7) discloses: “The term “substantially” means the value is within an acceptable error range.” However, the acceptable error range is not provided nor defined in any unambiguous terms.
Claim 10 recites “a total length … is substantially equal to 0.25 wavelength of the second frequency band.” The use of the term “substantially” renders the scope of the claim indefinite. The specification ([0011], lines 6-7) discloses: “The term “substantially” means the value is within an acceptable error range.” However, the acceptable error range is not provided nor defined in any unambiguous terms.
Claim 11 recites “a total length … is substantially equal to 0.25 wavelength of the third frequency band.” The use of the term “substantially” renders the scope of the claim indefinite. The specification ([0011], lines 6-7) discloses: “The term “substantially” means the value is within an acceptable error range.” However, the acceptable error range is not provided nor defined in any unambiguous terms.
Claim 12 recites “a total length … is substantially equal to 0.5 wavelength of the fourth frequency band.” The use of the term “substantially” renders the scope of the claim indefinite. The specification ([0011], lines 6-7) discloses: “The term “substantially” means the value is within an acceptable error range.” However, the acceptable error range is not provided nor defined in any unambiguous terms.
Claim 13 recites “a total length … is substantially equal to 0.5 wavelength of the fifth frequency band.” The use of the term “substantially” renders the scope of the claim indefinite. The specification ([0011], lines 6-7) discloses: “The term “substantially” means the value is within an acceptable error range.” However, the acceptable error range is not provided nor defined in any unambiguous terms.
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 1-6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chung et al. (US 7324050 B2, hereinafter Chung) in view of Heikura et al. (US 9973228 B2, hereinafter Heikura).
Regarding claim 1, as best understood, Chung (Fig. 3) discloses a hybrid antenna structure (102), comprising:
a ground element (1), providing a ground voltage (inherent);
a feeding radiation element (2), having a feeding point (regarding the feeding point, see annotated Fig. 3 in Chung below);
a first radiation element (7);
a first connection radiation element (regarding the first connection radiation element, see annotated Fig. 3 in Chung below);
a second connection radiation element (regarding the second connection radiation element, see annotated Fig. 3 in Chung below);
a second radiation element (8), coupled to the feeding radiation element, wherein the first radiation element is coupled through the first connection radiation element and the second connection radiation element to the second radiation element;
a shorting radiation element (4), wherein the second radiation element is coupled through the shorting radiation element to the ground voltage.
PNG
media_image1.png
650
1060
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Chung does not disclose a third radiation element, disposed adjacent to the second radiation element and an integrated module, coupled to the third radiation element, wherein the integrated module has functions of circuit adjustment and proximity sense.
Heikura (Figs. 1, 1B, and 2; col. 6, lines 33-41; col. 9, lines 61-67 and col. 10, lines1-5; col. 10, lines 24-52) teaches a radiation element (204 in Fig. 2 – corresponding to 104 in Figs. 1, 1B), disposed adjacent to another radiation element (202 in Fig. 2 – corresponding to 102 in Fig. 1 and 102a, 102b in Fig. 1B) and an integrated module (206 and 224 in Fig. 2), coupled to the radiation element, wherein the integrated module has functions of circuit adjustment (inherent for 224) and proximity sense (inherent for 206).
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Chung to add to the antenna structure a third radiation element, disposed adjacent to the second radiation element and an integrated module, coupled to the third radiation element, wherein the integrated module has functions of circuit adjustment and proximity sense. This modification would allow to detect a change in capacitance in the third radiation element in a presence of a human body and lower an output power of the antenna in response thereto and raise the output power of the antenna in an absence of the human body (see Heikura, col. 2, lines 7-22).
Regarding claim 2, as best understood, the modified Chung teaches the hybrid antenna structure of claim 1 as addressed above.
The modified Chung (Fig. 3) further teaches the first radiation element comprises a first segment, a second segment, and a third segment arranged in a first straight line (regarding the first segment, the second segment, and the third segment, see annotated Fig. 3 in Chung above).
Regarding claim 3, as best understood, the modified Chung teaches the hybrid antenna structure of claim 2 as addressed above.
The modified Chung (Fig. 3) further teaches the second radiation element comprises a fourth segment and a fifth segment arranged in a second straight line, and the second straight line is substantially parallel to the first straight line (regarding the fourth segment and the fifth segment, see annotated Fig. 3 in Chung above).
Regarding claim 4, as best understood, the modified Chung teaches the hybrid antenna structure of claim 3 as addressed above.
The modified Chung (Fig. 3) further teaches a closed loop is formed by the first connection radiation element, the second segment, the second connection radiation element, and the fourth segment (regarding the first connection radiation element, the second segment, the second connection radiation element, and the fourth segment, see annotated Fig. 3 in Chung above).
Regarding claim 5, as best understood, the modified Chung teaches the hybrid antenna structure of claim 3 as addressed above.
The modified Chung (Fig. 3) further teaches a first coupling gap (d4) is formed between the third segment and the fifth segment (regarding the third segment and the fifth segment, see annotated Fig. 3 in Chung above).
The modified Chung does not explicitly teach the limitation wherein a width of the first coupling gap is smaller than or equal to 2mm.
However, the current disclosure, Specification ([0026], lines 17-20), recites: “The above ranges of element sizes are calculated and obtained according to many experiment results, and they help to optimize the operational bandwidth and impedance matching of the hybrid antenna structure 100, and to reduce the interference between the integrated module 200 and other radiation elements.”
Further, Chung (col. 2, lines 58-61) teaches modifying the first coupling gap (d4) in order to improve the antenna performance.
Therefore, it would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Chung so that a width of the first coupling gap is smaller than or equal to 2mm. This modification would provide an antenna structure with low noise and improved signal reception (see Chung, col. 2, lines 58-61). Furthermore, it has been held that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or working ranges involves only routine skill in the art. In re Aller, 105 USPQ 233.
Regarding claim 6, as best understood, the modified Chung teaches the hybrid antenna structure of claim 3 as addressed above.
The modified Chung does not teach a second coupling gap is formed between the fourth segment and the third radiation element, and a width of the second coupling gap is smaller than or equal to 2mm.
Heikura (Fig. 1B) teaches a second coupling gap (regarding the second coupling gap, see annotated Fig. 1B in Heikura below) is formed between a radiation element (102a) and the third radiation element (104).
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Chung so that a second coupling gap is formed between the fourth segment and the third radiation element. This modification would allow to detect a change in capacitance in the third radiation element in a presence of a human body and lower an output power of the antenna in response thereto and raise the output power of the antenna in an absence of the human body (see Heikura, col. 2, lines 7-22).
The so modified Chung does not teach the limitation wherein a width of the second coupling gap is smaller than or equal to 2mm.
However, the current disclosure, Specification ([0026], lines 17-20), recites: “The above ranges of element sizes are calculated and obtained according to many experiment results, and they help to optimize the operational bandwidth and impedance matching of the hybrid antenna structure 100, and to reduce the interference between the integrated module 200 and other radiation elements.”
Further, Heikura (col. 7, lines 56-67) teaches that the capacitance of the third radiation element (104) may be varied for accurate detection of the presence of, for example, human tissue. As is well-known in the art the capacitance of the third radiation element depends on the gap between the fourth segment and the third radiation element.
Therefore, it would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Chung so that a width of the second coupling gap is smaller than or equal to 2mm. This modification would allow accurate detection of the presence of, for example, human tissue (see Heikura col. 7, lines 56-60). Furthermore, it has been held that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or working ranges involves only routine skill in the art. In re Aller, 105 USPQ 233.
Claims 7-13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over the modified Chung as applied to claim 3 in view of Kiran et al. (“Penta-band Planar Inverted F Antenna for Wireless Communication Applications”, 2022 IEEE Microwaves, Antennas, and Propagation Conference (MAPCON), 12-16 December 2022, hereinafter Kiran).
Regarding claim 7, as best understood, the modified Chung teaches the hybrid antenna structure of claim 3 as addressed above.
The modified Chung does not teach the limitation wherein the hybrid antenna structure covers a first frequency band, a second frequency band, a third frequency band, a fourth frequency band, and a fifth frequency band.
Kiran (Figs. 1, 2 – Design 4; Abstract) teaches an antenna structure which covers a first frequency band, a second frequency band, a third frequency band, a fourth frequency band, and a fifth frequency band (regarding the first frequency band, the second frequency band, the third frequency band, the fourth frequency band, and the fifth frequency band, see Abstract, lines 3-6). Coverage of additional frequency bands is achieved by adding additional elements (branches) to the antenna (see Figs. 1 and 2).
Therefore, it would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Chung by adding additional elements to the antenna structure so that it can cover a first frequency band, a second frequency band, a third frequency band, a fourth frequency band, and a fifth frequency band. This modification would provide a multiband antenna that could be used at variety of different frequencies with good impedance matching at the desired frequency bands of operation (see Kiran, Conclusion).
Regarding claim 8, as best understood, the modified Chung teaches the hybrid antenna structure of claim 7 as addressed above.
The modified Chung does not teach the limitation wherein the first frequency band is from 617MHz to 960MHz, the second frequency band is from 1400MHz to 2000MHz, the third frequency band is from 2000MHz to 2690MHz, the fourth frequency band is from 3300MHz to 5000MHz, and the fifth frequency band is from 5000MHz to 5925MHz.
Kiran (Abstract) teaches an antenna structure covering five frequency bands, wherein the first frequency band is from 760 to 810 MHz, the second frequency band is from 1010 to 1020 MHz, the third frequency band is from 1590 to 1610 MHz, the fourth frequency band is from 1850 to 1950 MHz, and the fifth frequency band is from 2560 – 2760 MHz. Kiran (Abstract) teaches that these frequency bands are obtained by extensive modifications of the antenna. Furthermore, it is well-known in the art that antenna frequency bands of operation are related to the total length of the antenna radiation elements responsible for the respective frequency bands. In addition, the current disclosure, Specification ([0026], lines 17-20), recites: “The above ranges of element sizes are calculated and obtained according to many experiment results, and they help to optimize the operational bandwidth and impedance matching of the hybrid antenna structure 100”. Thus, desired frequency bands of operation can be achieved by adjusting the lengths (dimensions) of the antenna radiation elements accordingly.
Therefore, it would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Chung so that the first frequency band is from 617MHz to 960MHz, the second frequency band is from 1400MHz to 2000MHz, the third frequency band is from 2000MHz to 2690MHz, the fourth frequency band is from 3300MHz to 5000MHz, and the fifth frequency band is from 5000MHz to 5925MHz. This modification would provide an antenna structure with the desired frequency bands of operation. Furthermore, it has been held that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or working ranges involves only routine skill in the art. In re Aller, 105 USPQ 233.
Regarding claim 9, as best understood, the modified Chung teaches the hybrid antenna structure of claim 7 as addressed above.
The modified Chung does not teach the limitation wherein a length of the third radiation element is substantially equal to 0.25 wavelength of the first frequency band.
However, it is well-known in the art that antenna frequency bands of operation are related to the total length of the antenna radiation elements responsible for the respective frequency bands, wherein the length of the respective radiation element equals fractions of the wavelength corresponding to a particular resonant frequency – e.g., 0.25 wavelengths for a monopole radiation element and 0.5 wavelengths for a dipole radiation element. Further, the current disclosure, Specification ([0026], lines 17-20), recites: “The above ranges of element sizes are calculated and obtained according to many experiment results, and they help to optimize the operational bandwidth and impedance matching of the hybrid antenna structure 100”. Thus, the lengths (dimensions) of the antenna radiation elements may be adjusted accordingly in order to obtain desired frequency bands of operation.
Therefore, it would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Chung so that a length of the third radiation element is substantially equal to 0.25 wavelength of the first frequency band. This modification would provide an antenna structure with the desired first frequency band of operation. Furthermore, it has been held that discovering an optimum value of a result effective variable involves only routine skill in the art. In re Boesch, 617 F.2d 272, 205 USPQ 215 (CCP A 1980).
Regarding claim 10, as best understood, the modified Chung teaches the hybrid antenna structure of claim 7 as addressed above.
The modified Chung does not teach the limitation wherein a total length of the first segment, the second segment, the second connection radiation element, and the feeding radiation element is substantially equal to 0.25 wavelength of the second frequency band.
However, it is well-known in the art that antenna frequency bands of operation are related to the total length of the antenna radiation elements responsible for the respective frequency bands, wherein the length of the respective radiation element equals fractions of the wavelength corresponding to a particular resonant frequency – e.g., 0.25 wavelengths for a monopole radiation element and 0.5 wavelengths for a dipole radiation element. Further, the current disclosure, Specification ([0026], lines 17-20), recites: “The above ranges of element sizes are calculated and obtained according to many experiment results, and they help to optimize the operational bandwidth and impedance matching of the hybrid antenna structure 100”. Thus, the lengths (dimensions) of the antenna segments and radiation elements may be adjusted accordingly in order to obtain desired frequency bands of operation.
Therefore, it would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Chung so that a total length of the first segment, the second segment, the second connection radiation element, and the feeding radiation element is substantially equal to 0.25 wavelength of the second frequency band. This modification would provide an antenna structure with the desired second frequency band of operation. Furthermore, it has been held that discovering an optimum value of a result effective variable involves only routine skill in the art. In re Boesch, 617 F.2d 272, 205 USPQ 215 (CCP A 1980).
Regarding claim 11, as best understood, the modified Chung teaches the hybrid antenna structure of claim 7 as addressed above.
The modified Chung does not teach the limitation wherein a total length of the third segment, the second connection radiation element, and the feeding radiation element is substantially equal to 0.25 wavelength of the third frequency band.
However, it is well-known in the art that antenna frequency bands of operation are related to the total length of the antenna radiation elements responsible for the respective frequency bands, wherein the length of the respective radiation element equals fractions of the wavelength corresponding to a particular resonant frequency – e.g., 0.25 wavelengths for a monopole radiation element and 0.5 wavelengths for a dipole radiation element. Further, the current disclosure, Specification ([0026], lines 17-20), recites: “The above ranges of element sizes are calculated and obtained according to many experiment results, and they help to optimize the operational bandwidth and impedance matching of the hybrid antenna structure 100”. Thus, the lengths (dimensions) of the antenna segments and radiation elements may be adjusted accordingly in order to obtain desired frequency bands of operation.
Therefore, it would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Chung so that a total length of the third segment, the second connection radiation element, and the feeding radiation element is substantially equal to 0.25 wavelength of the third frequency band. This modification would provide an antenna structure with the desired third frequency band of operation. Furthermore, it has been held that discovering an optimum value of a result effective variable involves only routine skill in the art. In re Boesch, 617 F.2d 272, 205 USPQ 215 (CCP A 1980).
Regarding claim 12, as best understood, the modified Chung teaches the hybrid antenna structure of claim 7 as addressed above.
The modified Chung does not teach the limitation wherein a total length of the shorting radiation element, the fourth segment, and the feeding radiation element is substantially equal to 0.5 wavelength of the fourth frequency band.
However, it is well-known in the art that antenna frequency bands of operation are related to the total length of the antenna radiation elements responsible for the respective frequency bands, wherein the length of the respective radiation element equals fractions of the wavelength corresponding to a particular resonant frequency – e.g., 0.25 wavelengths for a monopole radiation element and 0.5 wavelengths for a dipole radiation element. Further, the current disclosure, Specification ([0026], lines 17-20), recites: “The above ranges of element sizes are calculated and obtained according to many experiment results, and they help to optimize the operational bandwidth and impedance matching of the hybrid antenna structure 100”. Thus, the lengths (dimensions) of the antenna segments and radiation elements may be adjusted accordingly in order to obtain desired frequency bands of operation.
Therefore, it would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Chung so that a total length of the shorting radiation element, the fourth segment, and the feeding radiation element is substantially equal to 0.5 wavelength of the fourth frequency band. This modification would provide an antenna structure with the desired fourth frequency band of operation. Furthermore, it has been held that discovering an optimum value of a result effective variable involves only routine skill in the art. In re Boesch, 617 F.2d 272, 205 USPQ 215 (CCP A 1980).
Regarding claim 13, as best understood, the modified Chung teaches the hybrid antenna structure of claim 7 as addressed above.
The modified Chung does not teach the limitation wherein a total length of the first connection radiation element, the second segment, the second connection radiation element, and the fourth segment is substantially equal to 0.5 wavelength of the fifth frequency band.
However, it is well-known in the art that antenna frequency bands of operation are related to the total length of the antenna radiation elements responsible for the respective frequency bands, wherein the length of the respective radiation element equals fractions of the wavelength corresponding to a particular resonant frequency – e.g., 0.25 wavelengths for a monopole radiation element and 0.5 wavelengths for a dipole radiation element. Further, the current disclosure, Specification ([0026], lines 17-20), recites: “The above ranges of element sizes are calculated and obtained according to many experiment results, and they help to optimize the operational bandwidth and impedance matching of the hybrid antenna structure 100”. Thus, the lengths (dimensions) of the antenna segments and radiation elements may be adjusted accordingly in order to obtain desired frequency bands of operation.
Therefore, it would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Chung so that a total length of the first connection radiation element, the second segment, the second connection radiation element, and the fourth segment is substantially equal to 0.5 wavelength of the fifth frequency band. This modification would provide an antenna structure with the desired fifth frequency band of operation. Furthermore, it has been held that discovering an optimum value of a result effective variable involves only routine skill in the art. In re Boesch, 617 F.2d 272, 205 USPQ 215 (CCP A 1980).
Claims 14-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over the modified Chung as applied to claim 1 in view of Kuo et al. (US 12394915 B2, hereinafter Kuo).
The applied reference (Kuo) has a common assignee with the instant application. Based upon the earlier effectively filed date of the reference, it constitutes prior art under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2).
This rejection under 35 U.S.C. 103 might be overcome by: (1) a showing under 37 CFR 1.130(a) that the subject matter disclosed in the reference was obtained directly or indirectly from the inventor or a joint inventor of this application and is thus not prior art in accordance with 35 U.S.C.102(b)(2)(A); (2) a showing under 37 CFR 1.130(b) of a prior public disclosure under 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(B); or (3) a statement pursuant to 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) establishing that, not later than the effective filing date of the claimed invention, the subject matter disclosed and the claimed invention were either owned by the same person or subject to an obligation of assignment to the same person or subject to a joint research agreement. See generally MPEP § 717.02.
Regarding claim 14, the modified Chung teaches the hybrid antenna structure of claim 1 as addressed above.
The modified Chung does not teach a filter circuit; a proximity sensor, wherein the third radiation element is coupled through the filter circuit to the proximity sensor; and a tuning circuit, wherein the filter circuit is coupled through the tuning circuit to the ground voltage.
Kuo (Figs. 1, 2) teaches a filter circuit (170); a proximity sensor (180), wherein a radiation element (160) is coupled through the filter circuit to the proximity sensor; and a tuning circuit (190), wherein the filter circuit is coupled through the tuning circuit to the ground voltage (VSS – 110).
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Chung so that the integrated module comprises: a filter circuit; a proximity sensor, wherein the third radiation element is coupled through the filter circuit to the proximity sensor; and a tuning circuit, wherein the filter circuit is coupled through the tuning circuit to the ground voltage. This modification would prevent the proximity sensor from negatively affecting the radiation performance of the antenna structure and would reduce the interference between the proximity sensor and other radiation elements (see Kuo, col. 5, lines 51-62). In addition, this modification would increase the operational bandwidth of the antenna structure in the respective frequency bands of operation (see Kuo, col. 6, lines 9-17).
Regarding claim 15, the modified Chung teaches the hybrid antenna structure of claim 14 as addressed above.
The modified Chung does not teach explicitly the limitation wherein the filter circuit comprises: a capacitor, wherein the capacitor has a first terminal coupled to a first node, and a second terminal coupled to a second node; wherein the first node is coupled to the third radiation element.
However, Kuo (Fig. 2) teaches the filter circuit (270) comprises: a capacitor (C1), wherein the capacitor has a first terminal coupled to a first node (N1), and a second terminal coupled to a second node (N2); wherein the first node is coupled to a radiation element (160).
Therefore, it would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Chung so that the filter circuit comprises: a capacitor, wherein the capacitor has a first terminal coupled to a first node, and a second terminal coupled to a second node; wherein the first node is coupled to the third radiation element. This modification would prevent low-frequency noise of the proximity sensor from entering the tuning circuit (see Kuo, col. 5, lines 51-54).
Regarding claim 16, the modified Chung teaches the hybrid antenna structure of claim 15 as addressed above.
The modified Chung does not teach explicitly the limitation wherein the filter circuit further comprises a first inductor, wherein the first inductor has a first terminal coupled to the second node, and a second terminal coupled to the ground voltage.
However, Kuo (Fig. 2) teaches the filter circuit (270) further comprises a first inductor (L1), wherein the first inductor has a first terminal coupled to the second node (N2), and a second terminal coupled to the ground voltage (VSS – 110).
Therefore, it would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Chung so that the filter circuit further comprises a first inductor, wherein the first inductor has a first terminal coupled to the second node, and a second terminal coupled to the ground voltage. This modification would reduce the probability of the proximity sensor taking error actions when the tuning circuit is switched (see Kuo, col. 5, lines 54-57).
Regarding claim 17, the modified Chung teaches the hybrid antenna structure of claim 16 as addressed above.
The modified Chung does not teach explicitly the limitation wherein the filter circuit further comprises a second inductor, wherein the second inductor has a first terminal coupled to a third node, and a second terminal coupled to the first node.
However, Kuo (Fig. 2) teaches the filter circuit (270) further comprises a second inductor (L2), wherein the second inductor has a first terminal coupled to a third node (N3), and a second terminal coupled to the first node (N1).
Therefore, it would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Chung so that the filter circuit further comprises a second inductor, wherein the second inductor has a first terminal coupled to a third node, and a second terminal coupled to the first node. This modification would prevent the proximity sensor from negatively affecting the radiation performance of the antenna structure (see Kuo, col. 5, lines 57-60).
Regarding claim 18, the modified Chung teaches the hybrid antenna structure of claim 17 as addressed above.
The modified Chung does not teach explicitly the limitation wherein the filter circuit further comprises a resistor, wherein the resistor has a first terminal coupled to the third node, and a second terminal coupled to the proximity sensor.
However, Kuo (Fig. 2) teaches the filter circuit (270) further comprises a resistor (R1), wherein the resistor has a first terminal coupled to the third node (N3), and a second terminal coupled to the proximity sensor (180).
Therefore, it would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Chung so that the filter circuit further comprises a resistor, wherein the resistor has a first terminal coupled to the third node, and a second terminal coupled to the proximity sensor. This modification would reduce the interference between the proximity sensor and other radiation elements (see Kuo, col. 5, lines 60-62).
Regarding claim 19, the modified Chung teaches the hybrid antenna structure of claim 17 as addressed above.
The modified Chung does not teach explicitly the limitation wherein the filter circuit further comprises a third inductor, wherein the third inductor has a first terminal coupled to the third node, and a second terminal coupled to the proximity sensor.
However, Kuo (Fig. 3) teaches the filter circuit (370) further comprises a third inductor (L3), wherein the third inductor has a first terminal coupled to the third node (N3), and a second terminal coupled to the proximity sensor (180).
Therefore, it would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Chung so that the filter circuit further comprises a third inductor, wherein the third inductor has a first terminal coupled to the third node, and a second terminal coupled to the proximity sensor. This modification would reduce the interference between the proximity sensor and other radiation elements (see Kuo, col. 6, lines 44-47).
Regarding claim 20, the modified Chung teaches the hybrid antenna structure of claim 15 as addressed above.
The modified Chung does not teach explicitly the limitation wherein the tuning circuit comprises:
a short-circuited path, coupled to the ground voltage;
a capacitive path, coupled to the ground voltage;
an open-circuited path, coupled to the ground voltage;
an inductive path, coupled to the ground voltage; and
a switch element, wherein a terminal of the switch element is coupled to the second node, and another terminal of the switch element is switchable between the short-circuited path, the capacitive path, the open-circuited path, and the inductive path according to a control signal.
However, Kuo (Fig. 2; col. 5, lines 63-67 and col. 6, lines 1-8) teaches the tuning circuit (290) comprises:
a short-circuited path (291), coupled to the ground voltage (VSS – 110);
a capacitive path (292), coupled to the ground voltage (VSS – 110);
an open-circuited path (293), coupled to the ground voltage (VSS – 110);
an inductive path (294), coupled to the ground voltage (VSS – 110); and
a switch element (295), wherein a terminal of the switch element is coupled to the second node (N2), and another terminal of the switch element is switchable between the short-circuited path, the capacitive path, the open-circuited path, and the inductive path according to a control signal (SC).
Therefore, it would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Chung so that the tuning circuit comprises: a short-circuited path, coupled to the ground voltage; a capacitive path, coupled to the ground voltage; an open-circuited path, coupled to the ground voltage; an inductive path, coupled to the ground voltage; and a switch element, wherein a terminal of the switch element is coupled to the second node, and another terminal of the switch element is switchable between the short-circuited path, the capacitive path, the open-circuited path, and the inductive path according to a control signal. This modification would increase the operational bandwidth of the antenna structure in the respective frequency bands of operation (see Kuo, col. 6, lines 9-17).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MARIN STOYTCHEV STOYTCHEV whose telephone number is (571)272-3467. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri, 8:00-17:00.
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, Dimary Lopez can be reached at 571-270-7893. 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
/MARIN STOYTCHEV STOYTCHEV/Examiner, Art Unit 2845