Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 18, 2026
Application No. 18/797,774

ANTENNA MODULE

Non-Final OA §103
Filed
Aug 08, 2024
Examiner
LOTTER, DAVID E
Art Unit
2845
Tech Center
2800 — Semiconductors & Electrical Systems
Assignee
Delta Electronics Inc.
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
84%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
2y 3m
To Grant
94%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 84% — above average
84%
Career Allow Rate
493 granted / 584 resolved
+16.4% vs TC avg
Moderate +9% lift
Without
With
+9.4%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 3m
Avg Prosecution
21 currently pending
Career history
605
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.3%
-39.7% vs TC avg
§103
49.7%
+9.7% vs TC avg
§102
23.0%
-17.0% vs TC avg
§112
17.8%
-22.2% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 584 resolved cases

Office Action

§103
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 . Priority Acknowledgment is made of applicant's claim for foreign priority based on an application filed in China on 5/16/2024. It is noted, however, that applicant has not filed a certified copy of the CN 202410611414.1 application as required by 37 CFR 1.55. 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 1-2, 4, and 8-10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Cho et al., (US 2021/0320416) in view of Ryoo et al., (US 2021/0175609), hereinafter Ryoo, in further view of Ha (US 2025/0350029), hereinafter Ha. Regarding claim 1 Cho discloses an antenna module, adapted to transmit a wireless signal, comprising: a first dielectric layer (Fig. 5, at 111), comprising a first surface and a second surface, wherein the first surface is opposite to the second surface, and the first dielectric layer has a first dielectric constant (e.g., paragraph 0009); a ground layer (e.g., paragraph 0047; see also paragraph 0072), disposed on the first surface; a first radiator (Fig. 5, at 121), disposed on the second surface, wherein the first radiator has a first radiator area; a feed conductor (Fig. 5, at 126; paragraph 0066), coupled to the first radiator; a second dielectric layer (Fig. 5, at 112), comprising a third surface and a fourth surface, wherein the third surface is opposite to the fourth surface, the second dielectric layer covers the first radiator (Fig. 5, at 112 covers 121), the third surface contacts the first radiator and the second surface, and the second dielectric layer has a second dielectric constant (e.g., paragraph 0009); a second radiator (Fig. 5, at 122), disposed on the fourth surface, wherein the second radiator has a second radiator area the second radiator is completely within the projection region defined by the first radiator (Fig. 5, at 121 and 122); and a third dielectric layer (Fig. 5, at 113), disposed on the fourth surface and covering the second radiator, wherein the third dielectric layer has a third dielectric constant (e.g., paragraph 0009). Cho does not disclose the first radiator area is greater than the second radiator area, and on a projection surface. Ryoo discloses the first radiator area is greater than the second radiator area, and on a projection surface (e.g., Fig. 1C, at 112a and 115b). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the antenna disclosed by Cho in accordance with the teaching of Ryoo regarding the first radiator area is greater than the second radiator area, and on a projection surface in order to improve the quality of the antenna communications (Ryoo, paragraph 0005). Choo and Ryoo teach varying the dielectric constants of the various layers. However, Ha more explicitly teaches varying the dielectric constants of the various dielectric layers (e.g., paragraph 0021; see also paragraphs 0022-0028; see further paragraphs 0054-0062). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the antenna disclosed by Cho in accordance with the teaching of Ryoo and further in accordance with the teachings of Ha regarding varying the dielectric constants of the various dielectric layers in the antenna module to wherein the third dielectric layer has a third dielectric constant, the first dielectric constant is greater than the third dielectric constant, and the third dielectric constant is greater than the second dielectric constant in order to have a small thickness, high isolation, a small length in the arrangement direction of a plurality of antenna areas, or a wide bandwidth (paragraph 0029). PNG media_image1.png 304 451 media_image1.png Greyscale Regarding claim 2 Cho does not explicitly disclose the antenna module as claimed in claim 1, wherein the third dielectric constant is equal to the average of the first dielectric constant and the second dielectric constant. Ha implicitly teaches wherein the third dielectric constant is equal to the average of the first dielectric constant and the second dielectric constant (paragraph 0021; see also paragraphs 0022-0028; see further paragraphs 0054-0062). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the antenna disclosed by Cho in accordance with the teaching of Ryoo and further in accordance with the teachings of Ha regarding varying the dielectric constants of the various dielectric layers in the antenna module in order to have a small thickness, high isolation, a small length in the arrangement direction of a plurality of antenna areas, or a wide bandwidth (paragraph 0029). Regarding claim 4 Cho further discloses the antenna module as claimed in claim 1, wherein the first radiator is square (e.g., Fig. 4, at 121), the first radiator has a first side-length, the second radiator is square, the second radiator has a second side-length (e.g., Fig. 4, at 123), Cho does not explicitly teach the second side-length is less than or equal to 0.86 times the first side-length. Cho teaches wherein the second side-length is less than the first side-length (Fig. 4 at 121 and 123). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to where the first radiator has a first side length higher than the second side length, since Cho teaches wherein the first radiator has a first side length higher than the second side length (Fig. 4 at 121 and 123), and since 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 8 Cho further discloses the antenna module as claimed in claim 1, wherein the feed conductor passes through the ground layer and the first dielectric layer (e.g., Fig. 5, at 126; paragraph 0072), and one end of the feed conductor is connected to the bottom surface of the first radiator (e.g., Fig. 5, at 121 and 126). Regarding claim 9 Cho further discloses the antenna module as claimed in claim 1, wherein the feed conductor is disposed on the second surface, the feed conductor is sandwiched between the first dielectric layer and the second dielectric layer, and one end of the feed conductor is connected to a lateral surface of the first radiator (Fig. 5, at 126). Regarding claim 10 Cho further discloses the antenna module as claimed in claim 1, further comprising a fourth dielectric layer (paragraph 0009; see also paragraph 0056), wherein the fourth dielectric layer comprises a fifth surface and a sixth surface (e.g., paragraph 0009), the fifth surface is connected to the ground layer (e.g., paragraphs 0009 and paragraph 0047; see also paragraph 0072), the ground layer is sandwiched between the first dielectric layer and the fourth dielectric layer (e.g., paragraphs 0009 and paragraph 0047; see also paragraph 0072), the sixth surface is opposite to the fifth surface, the feed conductor is situated on the sixth surface, and the feed conductor corresponds to the first radiator (e.g., paragraphs 0009 and paragraph 0047; see also paragraph 0072). Claim 3 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Cho in view of Ryoo and Ha as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Nair et al., (US 2025/0329931), hereinafter Nair. Regarding claim 3 Cho as modified does not explicitly disclose the antenna module as claimed in claim 1, wherein the second radiator area is less than or equal to 0.75 times the first radiator area. Nair discloses wherein the second radiator area is less the first radiator area (e.g., Fig. 1 at 9 and 10; paragraph 0038). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to wherein the second radiator area is less than or equal to 0.75 times the first radiator area, since Ha teaches wherein the second radiator area is less the first radiator area (Nair, paragraph 0038), and since 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 5-7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Cho in view of Ryoo and Ha as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Chen et al., (US 2023/0402744), hereinafter Chen. Regarding claim 5 Cho does not explicitly disclose the antenna module as claimed in claim 1, wherein the first dielectric layer has a first thickness, the second dielectric layer has a second thickness, the third dielectric layer has a third thickness, the third thickness is greater than the first thickness, and the third thickness is greater than the second thickness. Chen teaches using different thicknesses for different dielectric layers (e.g., paragraph 0036). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to wherein the first dielectric layer has a first thickness, the second dielectric layer has a second thickness, the third dielectric layer has a third thickness, the third thickness is greater than the first thickness, and the third thickness is greater than the second thickness, since Chen teaches using different thicknesses for different dielectric layers (e.g., paragraph 0036 “the thickness of each of the dielectric layers in the interconnect structure 106 can be different from each other.…to maintain the quality of the signal transmission. In other words, the thickness of dielectric layer in the present application is adjustable, depending on the frequency of the RF signal transmitted designed for the antenna package structure”), and since 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 Cho does not explicitly disclose the antenna module as claimed in claim 5, wherein the third thickness is less than twice the first thickness. Chen teaches using different thicknesses for different dielectric layers (e.g., paragraph 0036). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to wherein the third thickness is less than twice the first thickness, since Chen teaches using different thicknesses for different dielectric layers (e.g., paragraph 0036 “the thickness of each of the dielectric layers in the interconnect structure 106 can be different from each other.…to maintain the quality of the signal transmission. In other words, the thickness of dielectric layer in the present application is adjustable, depending on the frequency of the RF signal transmitted designed for the antenna package structure”), and since 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 7 Cho teaches wherein the wireless signal has a center frequency wavelength (e.g., paragraph 0005). Cho does not explicitly disclose the antenna module as claimed in claim 5, wherein the first thickness is equal to 0.045 times the center frequency wavelength. Chen teaches using different thicknesses for different dielectric layers (e.g., paragraph 0036). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to wherein the first thickness is equal to 0.045 times the center frequency wavelength, since Chen teaches using different thicknesses for different dielectric layers (e.g., paragraph 0036 “the thickness of each of the dielectric layers in the interconnect structure 106 can be different from each other.…to maintain the quality of the signal transmission. In other words, the thickness of dielectric layer in the present application is adjustable, depending on the frequency of the RF signal transmitted designed for the antenna package structure”), and since 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. Conclusion The Examiner has pointed out particular references contained in the prior art of record within the body of this action for the convenience of the Applicant. Although the specified citations are representative of the teachings in the art and are applied to the specific limitations within the individual claim, other passages and figures may apply. Applicant, in preparing the response, should consider fully the entire reference aspotentially teaching all or part of the claimed invention, as well as the context of thepassage as taught by the prior art or disclosed by the Examiner. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DAVID E LOTTER whose telephone number is (571)270-7422. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 10am-6pm. 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. DAVID E. LOTTER Primary Examiner Art Unit 2845 /DAVID E LOTTER/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2845
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Aug 08, 2024
Application Filed
Mar 28, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12597705
SPACE-WAVE PHASE-SHIFTING ARRAY
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12597701
BASE STATION ANTENNAS HAVING F-STYLE ARRAYS THAT GENERATE ANTENNA BEAMS HAVING NARROWED AZIMUTH BEAMWIDTHS
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12596143
OVER THE AIR (OTA) TESTING OF AN ANTENNA IN PACKAGE (AIP) DEVICE IN RADIATING NEAR FIELD USING A CHARACTERIZING DEVICE AND AUTOMATED TEST EQUIPMENT
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12597707
ANTENNA MODULE AND ELECTRONIC DEVICE
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12592475
ANTENNA STRUCTURE AND DISPLAY DEVICE INCLUDING THE SAME
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

AI Strategy Recommendation

Get an AI-powered prosecution strategy using examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Powered by AI — typically takes 5-10 seconds

Prosecution Projections

1-2
Expected OA Rounds
84%
Grant Probability
94%
With Interview (+9.4%)
2y 3m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 584 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allow rate.

Sign in with your work email

Enter your email to receive a magic link. No password needed.

Personal email addresses (Gmail, Yahoo, etc.) are not accepted.

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month