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 .
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1-5 and 7-12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Jeon (US 2020/0076055 A1). (Applicant’s cited prior art).
Regarding claim 1, Jeon (Figure 9) teaches a MIMO (multiple input and multiple output) antenna system comprising:
a dielectric substrate (PCB, para [0123]);
a first MIMO antenna 700 mounted on the dielectric substrate; and
a second MIMO antenna 700 mounted on the dielectric substrate and beside the first
MIMO antenna,
wherein the first MIMO antenna and the second MIMO antenna are configured to wirelessly access a set of first signals.
Regarding claim 2, as applied to claim 1, Jeon (Figures 3A-3C) teaches that the first MIMO antenna comprises:
M radiators 234 and 324 separated from each other, wherein the M radiators are configured
to wirelessly access the set of first signals; and
M feeding elements 236 and 326 formed below the M radiators, connected to a first
processing circuit, and configured to access a set of second signals corresponding to the set of first signals between the M feeding elements and the first processing circuit, wherein M is a positive integer greater than 2, and
wherein the second MIMO antenna comprises:
N radiators 234 and 324 separated from each other, wherein the N radiators are configured
to wirelessly access the set of first signals; and
N feeding elements 236 and 326 formed below the N radiators, connected to a second
processing circuit, and configured to access the set of second signals corresponding to the set of first signals between the N feeding elements and the second processing circuit, wherein N is a positive integer greater than 2.
Regarding claim 3, as applied to claim 2, Jeon (Figure 9) teaches that the M radiators of the first MIMO antenna 700 are facing a first direction, and the N radiators of the second MIMO antenna are facing a second direction.
Regarding claim 4, as applied to claim 2, Jeon (Figures 3A and 3C) teaches that the M radiators 234 and 324 of the first MIMO antenna 700 are planar conductors extending parallel to a first plane, and the N radiators 234 and 324 of the second MIMO antenna 700 are planar conductors extending parallel to a second plane parallel to the first plane.
Regarding claim 5, as applied to claim 3, Jeon (Figure 9) teaches that all antenna units face the same direction which corresponds to a first angle between the first direction and the second direction is 0 degrees.
Regarding claim 7, as applied to claim 2, Jeon (Figure 9) teaches that each of the antenna units 700 having the same number of radiators which corresponds to N is equal to M.
Regarding claim 8, as applied to claim 7, Jeon (Figures 7 and 9) teaches the antenna units 230, 320, 610, 620, 710, 720, 730 and 740 arranged around a reference point or the center of element 750 which corresponds to the M radiators of each of the first MIMO antenna and the second MIMO antenna are arranged around a reference point.
Regarding claim 9, as applied to claim 8, Jeon (Figures 7 and 9) teaches that the M radiators of each of the first MIMO antenna and the second MIMO antenna have a first polarization direction to an Mth polarization direction, wherein the first polarization direction of the M radiators of the first MIMO antenna are corresponding to the first polarization direction of the M radiators of the second MIMO antenna.
Regarding claim 10, as applied to claim 9, Jeon (Figures 7 and 9) teaches that the first polarization direction of the M radiators of the first MIMO antenna is parallel the first polarization direction of the M radiators of the second MIMO antenna.
Regarding claim 11, as applied to claim 9, Jeon (Figures 7 and 9) teaches that a second angle between the first polarization direction of the M radiators of the first MIMO antenna and the first polarization direction of the M radiators of the second MIMO antenna is A(360/M) degrees, wherein A is a positive integer from 1 to M.
Regarding claim 12, as applied to claim 9, Jeon (Figures 7 and 9) teaches that a second angle between the first polarization direction of the M radiators of the first MIMO antenna and the first polarization direction of the M radiators of the second MIMO antenna is less than 360/M degrees.
Claims 1-3 and 14-16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Park et al (US 2022/0336967 A1), hereinafter Park. (Applicant’s cited prior art).
Regarding claim 1, Park (Figures 5 and 6A) teaches a MIMO (multiple input and multiple output) antenna system comprising:
a dielectric substrate 510;
a first MIMO antenna AR1 mounted on the dielectric substrate; and
a second MIMO antenna AR3 mounted on the dielectric substrate and beside the first MIMO antenna,
wherein the first MIMO antenna and the second MIMO antenna are configured to wirelessly access a set of first signals.
Regarding claim 2, as applied to claim 1, Park (Figure 5, para [0139] and [0149]) teaches that the first MIMO antenna comprises:
M radiators (4 radiators) separated from each other, wherein the M radiators are configured to wirelessly access the set of first signals; and
M feeding elements (2 feeds) formed below the M radiators, connected to a first processing circuit, and configured to access a set of second signals corresponding to the set of first signals between the M feeding elements and the first processing circuit, wherein M is a positive integer greater than 2, and
wherein the second MIMO antenna comprises:
N radiators (4 radiators) separated from each other, wherein the N radiators are configured to wirelessly access the set of first signals; and
N feeding elements (2 feeds) formed below the N radiators, connected to a second processing circuit, and configured to access the set of second signals corresponding to the set of first signals between the N feeding elements and the second processing circuit, wherein N is a positive integer greater than 2.
Regarding claim 3, as applied to claim 2, Park (Figure 5) teaches that the radiator arrays AR1 and AR3 have a different boresight which corresponds to the M radiators of the first MIMO antenna are facing a first direction, and the N radiators of the second MIMO antenna are facing a second direction.
Regarding claim 14, as applied to claim 2, Park (Figures 5 and 6A) teaches that the M radiators of the first MIMO antenna are planar conductors extending parallel to a first plane, and the N radiators of the second MIMO antenna are planar conductors extending parallel to a second plane perpendicular to the first plane.
Regarding claim 15, as applied to claim 3, Park (Figures 5 and 6A) teaches that a first angle between the first direction and the second direction is 90 degrees.
Regarding claim 16, as applied to claim 2, Park (Figures 5 and 6A) teaches that the M radiators of the first MIMO antenna and the N radiators of the second MIMO antenna are arranged linearly.
Claims 1-2 and 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Yamada et al (WO 2023/037806 A1), hereinafter Yamada. (Applicant’s cited prior art).
Regarding claim 1, Yamada (Figure 3) teaches a MIMO (multiple input and multiple output) antenna system comprising:
a dielectric substrate 50;
a first MIMO antenna 121A mounted on the dielectric substrate; and
a second MIMO antenna 121B mounted on the dielectric substrate and beside the first MIMO antenna,
wherein the first MIMO antenna and the second MIMO antenna are configured to wirelessly access a set of first signals (para [0032], [0044] and [0048]).
Regarding claim 2, as applied to claim 1, Yamada (para [0044] and [0048]) teaches that the first MIMO antenna comprises:
M radiators separated from each other, wherein the M radiators are configured
to wirelessly access the set of first signals; and
M feeding elements formed below the M radiators, connected to a first
processing circuit, and configured to access a set of second signals corresponding to the set of first signals between the M feeding elements and the first processing circuit, wherein M is a positive integer greater than 2, and
wherein the second MIMO antenna comprises:
N radiators separated from each other, wherein the N radiators are configured
to wirelessly access the set of first signals; and
N feeding elements formed below the N radiators, connected to a second
processing circuit, and configured to access the set of second signals corresponding to the set of first signals between the N feeding elements and the second processing circuit, wherein N is a positive integer greater than 2.
Regarding claim 18, as applied to claim 2, Yamada (Figure 3) teaches that the first MIMO antenna 121A comprises three radiators and the second MIMO antenna 121B comprises two radiators which corresponds to N being not equal to M.
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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claims 6 and 19-21 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jeon.
Regarding claim 6, Jeon teaches the claimed invention, wherein a first angle between the first direction and the second direction is 0 degrees. Jeon does not explicitly teach that a first angle between the first direction and the second direction is 180 degrees. It would have been an obvious matter of design choice for a skilled artisan to configure the first angle between the first direction and the second direction is 180 degrees to achieve polarization diversity and obtaining a desired signal quality.
Regarding claim 20, as applied to claim 1, it would have been an obvious matter of design choice to configure the set of first signals have a first wavelength, and a first diameter of the first MIMO antenna and a second diameter of the second MIMO antenna are less than or equal to 0.5 times the first wavelength in order to achieve improved radiation efficiency and more stable radiation pattern across multiple bands.
Regarding claim 21, as applied to claim 1, it would have been an obvious matter of design choice to configure the set of first signals have a first wavelength, and a second distance between the first MIMO antenna and the second MIMO antenna is between 0.5 times the first wavelength and 8 times the first wavelength in order to achieve improved radiation efficiency and more stable radiation pattern across multiple bands.
Claim 13 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jeon in view of Ming et al (EP 3 208 887 A1), hereinafter Ming.
Regarding claim 13, Jeon teaches the claimed invention, as applied to claim 6, except explicitly mention that the first MIMO antenna is stacked on the second MIMO antenna.
Ming (Figure 2b, para [0014]) teaches an antenna system comprising stacked MIMO antennas.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to configure the first MIMO antenna to be stacked on the second MIMO antenna, as taught by Ming, doing so would enable increased throughput and data rates, improving signal strength and reliability.
Claim 17 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Park.
Regarding claim 17, Park teaches the claimed invention, as applied to claim 16, wherein the M radiators of the first MIMO antenna and the N radiators of the second MIMO antenna are arranged linearly. It would have been an obvious matter of design choice to configure a third angle between polarization directions of two adjacent M radiators of the first MIMO antenna and a fourth angle between polarization directions of two adjacent N radiators of the second MIMO antenna to be equal to 90 degrees in order to achieve a desired polarization diversity suitable for a specific application.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to HOANG V NGUYEN whose telephone number is (571)272-1825. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 8am-5pm.
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) 270-7983. 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.
/HOANG V NGUYEN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2845