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 .
Specification
The disclosure is objected to because of the following informalities:
[0047] (lines 5-7) discloses: “… the antenna structure 1 can change the corresponding center frequency by adjusting the first length L1 of the frequency adjustment segment 13”. The cited statement is incorrect. The first length L1 is associated with the bandwidth adjustment segment 12 (see [0042], lines 5-6) and the second length L2 is associated with the frequency adjustment segment 13 (see [0046], lines 1-2).
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 (lines 23-24) and claim 15 (lines 19-20) recite “at least one sensor located within the three-dimensional sensing space”. The scope of this limitation is indefinite since no clear boundary/boundaries of the three-dimensional sensing space is/are provided. The specification ([0034]) discloses: “Furthermore, the three-dimensional sensing space S is generally spherical, and its radius can be changed by adjusting the transmission power of the communication element 2 according to actual needs. For example, the range of the three-dimensional sensing space S is changeable by adjusting the operation of the communication element 2 between a first transmission power and a second transmission power that is greater than the first transmission power. Specifically, the communication element 2 operating at the first transmission power can generate a smaller three-dimensional sensing space S (e.g., FIG. 1), and the communication element 2 operating at the second transmission power can generate a larger three-dimensional sensing space S (e.g., FIG. 2).” However, as described in the specification, the three-dimensional sensing space is defined only in relative terms. Absent defining the radius of the three-dimensional sensing space in terms of the transmission power (e.g., a certain fraction of the transmission power) or by some other unambiguous means the scope of this limitation is indefinite.
Claims 2-14 inherit the indefiniteness of claim 1 and are subsequently rejected, as well.
Claims 16-18 inherit the indefiniteness of claim 15 and are subsequently rejected, as well.
Claim 19 (lines 26-27) recites “a plurality of sensors respectively placed in a plurality of independent chambers located within the three-dimensional sensing space”. The scope of this limitation is indefinite in two aspects.
Firstly, it is not clear whether the plurality of sensors or the plurality of independent chambers are located within the three-dimensional sensing space.
Secondly, no clear boundary/boundaries of the three-dimensional sensing space is/are provided (see comments regarding claims 1 and 15 above).
Claim 20 inherits the indefiniteness of claim 19 and are subsequently rejected, as well.
Claim 20 (lines 2-3) recites “any external sensor located outside of the three-dimensional sensing space”. The scope of this limitation is indefinite since no clear boundary/boundaries of the three-dimensional sensing space is/are provided (see comments regarding claims 1 and 15 above).
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 and 9-12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wu et al. (US 20200083603 A1, hereinafter Wu) in view of Hellgren et al. (US 6853341 B1, hereinafter Hellgren).
Regarding claim 1, as best understood, Wu (Figs. 2 and 9) discloses an antenna device (100 – Fig. 2), comprising:
an antenna structure (110 – Fig. 2), comprising:
a ring-shaped segment having a first end portion, a second end portion spaced apart from the first end portion, and a surrounding portion connected between the first end portion and the second end portion; wherein a gap is formed between the first end portion and the second end portion, and the first end portion, the second end portion, and the surrounding portion jointly define a layout region that is in spatial communication with the gap (regarding the ring-shaped segment, the first end portion, the second end portion, the surrounding portion, the gap between the first end portion and the second end portion, and the layout region, see the annotated portion of Fig. 2 in Wu below);
a bandwidth adjustment segment located within the layout region and connected to the first end portion and a part of the surrounding portion adjacent to the first end portion; wherein the bandwidth adjustment segment has a first length along a first direction (regarding the bandwidth adjustment segment, the first length, and the first direction, see the annotated portion of Fig. 2 in Wu below); and
a communication element (15 – Fig. 9) electrically connected to the first end portion and the second end portion of the ring-shaped segment of the antenna structure (the first end portion and the second end portion of the ring-shaped segment of the antenna structure are electrically connected to the communication element through a coaxial transmission line (130 – Figs. 2, 9);
wherein a three-dimensional sensing space is established by the antenna structure through the communication element (inherent), so as to enable the antenna structure to obtain signals from at least one sensor located within the three-dimensional sensing space (inherent).
Wu does not disclose a frequency adjustment segment located within the layout region and connected to the bandwidth adjustment segment; wherein the frequency adjustment segment has a second length along the first direction, and the second length is greater than the first length.
PNG
media_image1.png
748
1410
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Hellgren (Fig. 3; col. 5, lines 5-12) teaches a ring-shaped antenna structure (10) comprising multiple frequency adjustment segments (16, 17) located within the ring-shaped antenna structure, wherein the multiple frequency adjustment segments have different positions and different lengths along two different directions. Furthermore, it is well-known in the art that by changing the length of the frequency adjustment segment(s) the current path length in a loop antenna changes accordingly, resulting in a different frequency of operation (the resonance frequency of a loop antenna corresponds to a wavelength which is equal to the effective current path length in the loop), wherein the position and the length of the frequency adjustment segment is limited only by the layout space provided.
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 Wu to add to the antenna structure a frequency adjustment segment located within the layout region and connected to the bandwidth adjustment segment; wherein the frequency adjustment segment has a second length along the first direction, and the second length is greater than the first length (see the added frequency adjustment segment in the annotated Fig. 2 in Wu above). This modification would provide means for tuning the antenna structure to the desired operating frequencies of the antenna (see Hellgren, col. 5, lines 10-12).
Regarding claim 2, as best understood, the modified Wu teaches the antenna device of claim 1 as addressed above.
Wu (Fig. 2) further teaches an auxiliary adjustment segment located within the layout region, the auxiliary adjustment segment has a third length along the first direction, and the third length is less than the first length (regarding the auxiliary adjustment segment and the third length, see annotated Fig. 2 in Wu above).
Wu does not teach explicitly an auxiliary adjustment segment connected to the frequency adjustment segment.
However, Hellgren (Fig. 3; col. 5, lines 5-12) teaches a ring-shaped antenna structure (10) comprising multiple frequency adjustment segments (16, 17) located within the ring-shaped antenna structure, wherein the multiple frequency adjustment segments have different positions. Furthermore, it is well-known in the art that the position(s) of the frequency adjustment segment(s) is limited only by the layout space provided.
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 Wu so as to provide the predictable result of the auxiliary adjustment segment being connected to the frequency adjustment segment. Furthermore, it has been held that rearranging parts of an invention involves only routine skill in the art. In re Japikse, 86 USPQ 70.
Regarding claim 3, as best understood, the modified Wu teaches the antenna device of claim 2 as addressed above.
Wu does not explicitly teach the limitation wherein the frequency adjustment segment is parallel to the first direction and has a strip-shaped structure; and the bandwidth adjustment segment and the auxiliary adjustment segment are respectively connected to two opposite sides of the frequency adjustment segment.
However, Hellgren (Fig. 3; col. 5, lines 5-12) teaches frequency adjustment segments (16, 17) parallel to the respective principal directions of an antenna structure (10), have a strip-shaped structure, and are located at different positions. Furthermore, it is well-known in the art that the position(s) of the frequency adjustment segment(s) is limited only by the layout space provided.
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 Wu so that the frequency adjustment segment is parallel to the first direction and has a strip-shaped structure; and the bandwidth adjustment segment and the auxiliary adjustment segment are respectively connected to two opposite sides of the frequency adjustment segment (see the frequency adjustment segment in the annotated Fig. 2 in Wu above). This modification would provide means for tuning the antenna structure to the desired operating frequencies of the antenna (see Hellgren, col. 5, lines 10-12). Furthermore, it has been held that rearranging parts of an invention involves only routine skill in the art. In re Japikse, 86 USPQ 70.
Regarding claim 4, as best understood, the modified Wu teaches the antenna device of claim 2 as addressed above.
Wu (Fig. 2) further teaches the frequency adjustment segment is spaced apart from another part of the surrounding portion adjacent to the second end portion by a configuration distance along a second direction perpendicular to the first direction (regarding the another part of the surrounding portion adjacent to the second end portion, the configuration distance, and the second direction, see annotated Fig. 2 in Wu above); a width of the auxiliary adjustment segment along the second direction is less than the configuration distance, and the auxiliary adjustment segment is spaced apart from the another part of the surrounding portion along the second direction (see annotated Fig. 2 in Wu above).
Regarding claim 5, as best understood, the modified Wu teaches the antenna device of claim 4 as addressed above.
Wu (Fig. 2) further teaches the auxiliary adjustment segment faces the second end portion along the first direction, and a slit being in spatial communication with the gap is formed between the auxiliary adjustment segment and the second end portion (regarding the slit, see annotated Fig. 2 in Wu above).
Regarding claim 6, as best understood, the modified Wu teaches the antenna device of claim 1 as addressed above.
Wu (Fig. 2) teaches a reference axis defined to be parallel to the first direction and passing through the gap (regarding the reference axis, see annotated Fig. 2 in Wu above).
Wu does not explicitly teach at least 90% of an area of the bandwidth adjustment segment is located at one side of the reference axis.
However, Wu (Fig. 2) teaches a portion of the bandwidth adjustment segment is located at one side of the reference axis. Wu ([0039]) further teaches that the lengths and the widths of various adjustment segments (112, 114) can be changed in order to achieve the desired bandwidth at different resonance frequencies. As is well-known in the art, changing a length and a width of an object results in changing the area covered by the object.
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 Wu so that at least 90% of an area of the bandwidth adjustment segment is located at one side of the reference axis. This modification would provide the antenna structure with the desired bandwidth at different resonance frequencies (see Wu, [0039]). 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 Wu teaches the antenna device of claim 1 as addressed above.
Wu (Fig. 2) teaches the ring-shaped segment has a circumference (see annotated Fig. 2 in Wu above; a circumference of the ring-shaped segment is inherent).
Wu does not explicitly teach the first length is less than or equal to 12.5% of the circumference, and the second length is less than or equal to 25% of the circumference.
However, Wu teaches the first length and the second length are fractions of the circumference (see annotated Fig. 2 in Wu above). Wu ([0039]) further teaches that the lengths and the widths of various adjustment segments (112, 114) can be changed in order to achieve the desired bandwidth at different resonance frequencies.
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 Wu so that the first length is less than or equal to 12.5% of the circumference, and the second length is less than or equal to 25% of the circumference.
This modification would provide the antenna structure with the desired bandwidth at different resonance frequencies (see Wu, [0039]). 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 10, as best understood, the modified Wu teaches the antenna device of claim 9 as addressed above.
Wu (Fig. 2) also teaches the antenna structure is configured to operate at a center frequency (inherent).
Wu does not explicitly teach the circumference of the ring-shaped segment is within a range from 70% to 100% of a wavelength corresponding to the center frequency.
However, Wu ([0038], lines 7-9) teaches the circumference of the ring-shaped segment (equivalent to the length of the loop antenna 110) is within a range from 75% to 100% of a wavelength corresponding to the frequency band of operation, which includes the center frequency as is well-known in the art.
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 Wu so that the circumference of the ring-shaped segment is within a range from 70% to 100% of a wavelength corresponding to the center frequency. This modification would provide the antenna device with an antenna structure having the desired resonance frequency. 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 11, as best understood, the modified Wu teaches the antenna device of claim 9 as addressed above.
Wu does not explicitly teach the limitation wherein a distance between the first end portion and the second end portion is less than or equal to 1% of the circumference of the ring-shaped segment.
However, Wu (Fig. 2) teaches a distance between the first end portion and the second end portion is a fraction of the circumference of the ring-shaped segment (see annotated Fig. 2 in Wu above). Further, it is well-known in the art that the distance between the first end portion (feed) and the second end portion (ground) of a ring-shaped antenna (e.g., loop antenna) may be small compared to the circumference/length of the antenna and does not change proportionally as the length of the antenna changes. Therefore, for a full-wavelength loop antenna as taught by Wu ([0038], lines 7-12), the distance between the first end portion and the second end portion of the antenna can vary in relation to the circumference/length of the antenna, since it may remain constant, while the length of the antenna can increase accordingly depending on the wavelength corresponding to the frequency of operation.
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 Wu so that a distance between the first end portion and the second end portion is less than or equal to 1% of the circumference of the ring-shaped segment. This modification would provide the antenna structure with the desired frequency of operation (see Wu, [0038], lines 7-12). 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 12, as best understood, the modified Wu teaches the antenna device of claim 1 as addressed above.
Wu does not explicitly teach the limitation wherein the bandwidth adjustment segment and the frequency adjustment segment occupy a range from 20% to 55% of an area of the layout region.
However, Wu teaches the bandwidth adjustment segment and the frequency adjustment segment occupy a portion of an area of the layout region (see annotated Fig. 2 in Wu above). Wu ([0039]) further teaches that the lengths and the widths of various adjustment segments (112, 114) can be changed in order to achieve the desired bandwidth at different resonance frequencies of the antenna. As is well-known in the art, changing a length and a width of an object results in changing the area covered by the object.
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 Wu so that the bandwidth adjustment segment and the frequency adjustment segment occupy a range from 20% to 55% of an area of the layout region. This modification would provide an antenna structure with the desired bandwidth at different resonance frequencies (see Wu, [0039]). 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 and 8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wu as applied to claim 6 in view of Shamir et al. (US 20040135726 A1, hereinafter Shamir).
Regarding claim 7, as best understood, the modified Wu teaches the antenna device of claim 6 as addressed above.
The modified Wu does not explicitly teach the frequency adjustment segment is located at another side of the reference axis.
However, Hellgren (Fig. 3; col. 5, lines 5-12) teaches frequency adjustment segments (16, 17) located at different positions in an antenna structure.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to modify Wu so that the frequency adjustment segment is located at another side of the reference axis, since it has been held that rearranging parts of an invention involves only routine skill in the art. In re Japikse, 86 USPQ 70. Furthermore, it has been held that the provision of adjustability, where needed, involves only routine skill in the art. In re Stevens, 101 USPQ 284 (CCPA 1954).
The modified Wu does not teach the limitation wherein the ring-shaped segment is mirror-symmetrical to the reference axis.
Shamir (Fig. 2a) teaches an antenna comprising a ring-shaped antenna segment, which is mirror-symmetrical with respect to a reference axis (regarding the ring-shaped antenna segment and the reference axis, see annotated Fig. 2a in Shamir below).
PNG
media_image2.png
642
580
media_image2.png
Greyscale
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 make the modified Wu so that the ring-shaped segment is mirror-symmetrical to the reference axis. This modification would provide a high performance, small antenna structure that is simple and inexpensive to manufacture (see Shamir, Abstract, lines 1-6).
Regarding claim 8, as best understood, the modified Wu teaches the antenna device of claim 6 as addressed above.
Wu does not explicitly teach the frequency adjustment segment is arranged along the reference axis.
However, Hellgren (Fig. 3; col. 5, lines 5-12) teaches frequency adjustment segments (16, 17) located at different positions in an antenna structure.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to make the modified Wu so that the frequency adjustment segment is arranged along the reference axis, since it has been held that rearranging parts of an invention involves only routine skill in the art. In re Japikse, 86 USPQ 70. Furthermore, it has been held that the provision of adjustability, where needed, involves only routine skill in the art. In re Stevens, 101 USPQ 284 (CCPA 1954).
The modified Wu does not teach the limitation wherein the ring-shaped segment is mirror-symmetrical to the reference axis.
Shamir (Fig. 2a) teaches an antenna comprising a ring-shaped antenna segment, which is mirror-symmetrical with respect to a reference axis (regarding the ring-shaped antenna segment and the reference axis, see annotated Fig. 2a in Shamir above).
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 make the modified Wu so that the ring-shaped segment is mirror-symmetrical to the reference axis. This modification would provide a high performance, small antenna structure that is simple and inexpensive to manufacture (see Shamir, Abstract, lines 1-6).
Claims 13 and 14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wu as applied to claim 1 in view of Oh et al. (US 20150207230 A1, hereinafter Oh).
Regarding claim 13, as best understood, the modified Wu teaches the antenna device of claim 1 as addressed above.
The modified Wu does not teach explicitly the limitation wherein the communication element is a Radio Frequency Identification (RFID) reader or a Global System for Mobile Communications (GSM) receiver.
Oh (Figs. 1, 4; [0031], lines 1-18 and [0032], lines 1-8) teaches a communication element (444 – Fig. 4), which is a Global System for Mobile Communications (GSM) receiver, connected to an antenna (100 – Fig. 1); wherein the antenna comprises a ring-shaped segment (130 – Fig. 1).
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 have the modified Wu by replacing the communication element in Wu with the communication element in Oh. This modification would provide the predictable result of an antenna device having a GSM receiver and being able to operate in the GSM frequency bands.
Regarding claim 14, as best understood, the modified Wu teaches the antenna device of claim 1 as addressed above.
The modified Wu also teaches a range of the three-dimensional sensing space is changeable by adjusting an operation of the communication element between a first transmission power and a second transmission power that is greater than the first transmission power (inherent – it is well-known in the art that the range of communication of a communication device changes with the transmission power; it is also well-known in the art that a communication device can change its transmission power to be greater or lower than a specific level).
Claims 15-16 and 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wu in view of Hellgren and Yenney et al. (US 8295777 B1, hereinafter Yenney).
Regarding claim 15, as best understood, Wu (Figs. 2 and 9) discloses an antenna structure (110 – Fig. 2), comprising:
a ring-shaped segment having a first end portion, a second end portion spaced apart from the first end portion, and a surrounding portion connected between the first end portion and the second end portion; wherein a gap is formed between the first end portion and the second end portion, and the first end portion, the second end portion, and the surrounding portion jointly define a layout region that is in spatial communication with the gap (regarding the ring-shaped segment, the first end portion, the second end portion, the surrounding portion, the gap between the first end portion and the second end portion, and the layout region, see the annotated portion of Fig. 2 in Wu above);
a bandwidth adjustment segment located within the layout region and connected to the first end portion and a part of the surrounding portion adjacent to the first end portion; wherein the bandwidth adjustment segment has a first length along a first direction (regarding the bandwidth adjustment segment, the first length, and the first direction, see the annotated portion of Fig. 2 in Wu above);
wherein a three-dimensional sensing space (inherent) is established by the antenna structure through a communication element (15 – Fig. 9), so as to enable the antenna structure to obtain signals from external sensors.
Wu does not disclose a frequency adjustment segment located within the layout region and connected to the bandwidth adjustment segment; wherein the frequency adjustment segment has a second length along the first direction, and the second length is greater than the first length.
Hellgren (Fig. 3; col. 5, lines 5-12) teaches a ring-shaped antenna structure (10) comprising multiple frequency adjustment segments (16, 17) located within the ring-shaped antenna structure, wherein the multiple frequency adjustment segments have different positions and different lengths along two different directions. Furthermore, it is well-known in the art that by changing the length of the frequency adjustment segment(s) the current path length in a loop antenna changes accordingly, resulting in a different frequency of operation (the resonance frequency of a loop antenna corresponds to a wavelength which is equal to the effective current path length in the loop), wherein the position and the length of the frequency adjustment segment is limited only by the layout space provided.
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 Wu to add to the antenna structure a frequency adjustment segment located within the layout region and connected to the bandwidth adjustment segment; wherein the frequency adjustment segment has a second length along the first direction, and the second length is greater than the first length (see the added frequency adjustment segment in the annotated Fig. 2 in Wu above). This modification would provide means for tuning the antenna structure to the desired operating frequencies of the antenna (see Hellgren, col. 5, lines 10-12).
The so modified Wu does not teach at least one sensor located within the three-dimensional sensing space.
However, Yenney (Fig. 1) teaches at least one sensor (110, 112) located within the three-dimensional sensing space of a wireless communication device (122).
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 make the modified Wu so that at least one sensor is located within the three-dimensional sensing space of the antenna structure. This modification would provide means for testing radio-frequency handoffs between plurality of radio-frequency sources by the antenna structure within an enclosed chamber (see Yenney, Abstract).
Regarding claim 16, as best understood, the modified Wu teaches the antenna structure of claim 15 as addressed above.
Wu (Fig. 2) further teaches an auxiliary adjustment segment located within the layout region, wherein the auxiliary adjustment segment has a third length along the first direction (regarding the auxiliary adjustment segment and the third length, see annotated Fig. 2 in Wu above), and the third length is less than the first length; wherein the ring-shaped segment has a circumference (inherent).
The modified Wu does not teach explicitly an auxiliary adjustment segment connected to the frequency adjustment segment.
However, Hellgren (Fig. 3; col. 5, lines 5-12) teaches a ring-shaped antenna structure (10) comprising multiple frequency adjustment segments (16, 17) located within the ring-shaped antenna structure, wherein the multiple frequency adjustment segments have different positions. Furthermore, it is well-known in the art that the position of the frequency adjustment segment is limited only by the layout space provided.
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 make the modified Wu so as to provide the predictable result of the auxiliary adjustment segment being connected to the frequency adjustment segment. Furthermore, it has been held that rearranging parts of an invention involves only routine skill in the art. In re Japikse, 86 USPQ 70.
The modified Wu does not teach explicitly the limitation wherein the first length is less than or equal to 12.5% of the circumference, and the second length is less than or equal to 25% of the circumference.
However, Wu teaches the first length and the second length are fractions of the circumference (see annotated Fig. 2 in Wu above). Wu ([0039]) further teaches that the lengths and the widths of various adjustment segments (112, 114) can be changed in order to achieve the desired bandwidth at different resonance frequencies.
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 make the modified Wu so that the first length is less than or equal to 12.5% of the circumference, and the second length is less than or equal to 25% of the circumference. This modification would provide the antenna structure with the desired bandwidth at different resonance frequencies (see Wu, [0039]). 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 18, as best understood, the modified Wu teaches the antenna structure of claim 15 as addressed above.
Wu (Fig. 2) further teaches the auxiliary adjustment segment faces the second end portion along the first direction, and a slit being in spatial communication with the gap is formed between the auxiliary adjustment segment and the second end portion (regarding the slit, see annotated Fig. 2 in Wu above).
The modified Wu does not teach explicitly a distance between the first end portion and the second end portion is less than or equal to 1% of the circumference of the ring-shaped segment.
However, Wu (Fig. 2) teaches a distance between the first end portion and the second end portion is a fraction of the circumference of the ring-shaped segment (see annotated Fig. 2 in Wu above). Further, it is well-known in the art that the distance between the first end portion (feed) and the second end portion (ground) of a ring-shaped antenna (e.g., loop antenna) may be small compared to the circumference/length of the antenna and does not change proportionally as the length of the antenna changes. Therefore, for a full-wavelength loop antenna as taught by Wu ([0038], lines 7-12), the distance between the first end portion and the second end portion of the antenna can vary in relation to the circumference/length of the antenna, since it may remain constant, while the length of the antenna can increase accordingly depending on the wavelength corresponding to the frequency of operation.
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 make the modified Wu so that a distance between the first end portion and the second end portion is less than or equal to 1% of the circumference of the ring-shaped segment. This modification would provide the antenna structure with the desired frequency of operation (see Wu, [0038], lines 7-12). 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.
Claim 17 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wu as applied to claim 16 in view of Shamir.
Regarding claim 17, as best understood, the modified Wu teaches the antenna structure of claim 16 as addressed above.
Wu (Fig. 2) further teaches a reference axis is defined to be parallel to the first direction and passing through the gap (regarding the reference axis, see annotated Fig. 2 in Wu above).
Wu does not explicitly teach at least 90% of the bandwidth adjustment segment is located at one side of the reference axis.
However, Wu (Fig. 2) teaches a portion of the bandwidth adjustment segment is located at one side of the reference axis. Wu ([0039]) further teaches that the lengths and the widths of various adjustment segments (112, 114) can be changed in order to achieve the desired bandwidth at different resonance frequencies. As is well-known in the art, changing a length and a width of an object results in changing the area covered by the object.
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 make the modified Wu so that at least 90% of the bandwidth adjustment segment is located at one side of the reference axis. This modification would provide the antenna structure with the desired bandwidth at different resonance frequencies (see Wu, [0039]). 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.
The modified Wu does not teach the limitation wherein the ring-shaped segment is mirror-symmetrical to the reference axis.
Shamir (Fig. 2a) teaches an antenna comprising a ring-shaped antenna segment, which is mirror-symmetrical with respect to a reference axis (regarding the ring-shaped antenna segment and the reference axis, see annotated Fig. 2a in Shamir above).
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 make the modified Wu so that the ring-shaped segment is mirror-symmetrical to the reference axis. This modification would provide a high performance, small antenna structure that is simple and inexpensive to manufacture (see Shamir, Abstract, lines 1-6).
Claims 19-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wu in view of Hellgren and Yenney.
Regarding claim 19, as best understood, Wu (Figs. 2 and 9) discloses an antenna system, comprising an antenna structure (110 – Fig. 2), comprising:
a ring-shaped segment having a first end portion, a second end portion spaced apart from the first end portion, and a surrounding portion connected between the first end portion and the second end portion; wherein a gap is formed between the first end portion and the second end portion, and the first end portion, the second end portion, and the surrounding portion jointly define a layout region communicating with the gap (regarding the ring-shaped segment, the first end portion, the second end portion, the surrounding portion, the gap between the first end portion and the second end portion, and the layout region, see the annotated portion of Fig. 2 in Wu above);
a bandwidth adjustment segment located within the layout region and connected to the first end portion and a part of the surrounding portion adjacent to the first end portion; wherein the bandwidth adjustment segment has a first length along a first direction (regarding the bandwidth adjustment segment, the first length, and the first direction, see the annotated portion of Fig. 2 in Wu above);
a communication element (15 – Fig. 9) electrically connected to the first end portion and the second end portion of the ring-shaped segment of the antenna structure; wherein a three-dimensional sensing space is established by the antenna structure through the communication element (inherent).
Wu does not disclose a frequency adjustment segment located within the layout region and connected to the bandwidth adjustment segment; wherein the frequency adjustment segment has a second length along the first direction, and the second length is greater than the first length.
Hellgren (Fig. 3; col. 5, lines 5-12) teaches a ring-shaped antenna structure (10) comprising multiple frequency adjustment segments (16, 17) located within the ring-shaped antenna structure, wherein the multiple frequency adjustment segments have different positions and different lengths along two different directions. Furthermore, it is well-known in the art that by changing the length of the frequency adjustment segment(s) the current path length in a loop antenna changes accordingly, resulting in a different frequency of operation (as is known in the art, the resonance frequency of a loop antenna corresponds to a wavelength which is equal to the effective current path length in the loop), wherein the position and the length of the frequency adjustment segment is limited only by the layout space provided.
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 Wu to add to the antenna structure a frequency adjustment segment located within the layout region and connected to the bandwidth adjustment segment; wherein the frequency adjustment segment has a second length along the first direction, and the second length is greater than the first length (see the added frequency adjustment segment in the annotated Fig. 2 in Wu above). This modification would provide means for tuning the antenna structure to the desired operating frequencies of the antenna (see Hellgren, col. 5, lines 10-12).
The modified Wu does not teach a plurality of sensors respectively placed in a plurality of independent chambers located within the three-dimensional sensing space, so that the antenna device is able to obtain signals from the plurality of sensors.
Yenney (Fig. 1) teaches a plurality of sensors (110, 112) respectively placed in a plurality of independent chambers (106, 108) located within the three-dimensional sensing space (inherent), so that an antenna device (122) is able to obtain signals from the plurality of sensors (inherent).
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 make the modified Wu according to the teachings of Yenney. This modification would provide means for testing radio-frequency handoffs between plurality of radio-frequency sources by the antenna device within an enclosed chamber (see Yenney, Abstract).
Regarding claim 20, as best understood, the modified Wu teaches the antenna system of claim 19 as addressed above.
The modified Wu also teaches the antenna device does not obtain signals from any external sensor located outside of the three-dimensional sensing space (inherent – by default an antenna device cannot obtain signals from any external sensor located outside of its three-dimensional sensing space).
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.
/MARIN STOYTCHEV STOYTCHEV/Examiner, Art Unit 2845
/DIMARY S LOPEZ CRUZ/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2845