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 .
Double Patenting
The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory double patenting rejection is appropriate where the conflicting claims are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969).
A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on nonstatutory double patenting provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with the examined application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. See MPEP § 717.02 for applications subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA as explained in MPEP § 2159. See MPEP § 2146 et seq. for applications not subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b).
The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The actual filing date of the application in which the form is filed determines what form (e.g., PTO/SB/25, PTO/SB/26, PTO/AIA /25, or PTO/AIA /26) should be used. A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/applying-online/eterminal-disclaimer.
Claims 21-40 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-2 & 4-14 of U.S. Patent No. US 11,652,453 B2 and claims 1-5 & 7-13 of U.S. Patent No. US 12,081,181 B2. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because they are not patentably distinct from each other and because they are substantially similar in scope and they use same limitations. Accordingly, application claims 21-40 are not patentably distinct from patent claims 1-5 & 7-13 of Patent no. US 11,652,453 B2) and 1-5 & 7-13 of Patent No. US 12,081,181 B2, under an “anticipate" analysis.
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)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 21, 25-28, 32, 34-35 & 39-40 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Jung et al. (US 20210119671 A1), hereinafter called Jung.
Regarding claim 21:
Jung discloses in Figs. 4 & 5, a tunable circuit comprising:
a first coil (LP1-LP3) configured to receive a signal (input signal of amplifier 20);
a second coil (LS1-LS3) coupled to the first coil and configured to provide an output signal (OT); and
a first switch (e.g., switch SW2) coupled between a first portion (LS1) of the second coil and a second portion (LS3) of the second coil, the first switch (SW2) being controllable to selectively couple the second portion of the second coil to the first coil based on a mode of operation.
Regarding claim 25:
Jung discloses further comprising a pair of amplifiers ( amplifier 20 include plurality amplifiers) configured to generate a pair of amplified signal components, the first coil is configured to receive the pair of amplified signal components.
Regarding claim 26:
Jung discloses wherein the second portion (LS3) of the second coil includes a first end that is coupled to the first switch (SW2) and a second end that is coupled to a ground (ground).
Regarding claim 27:
Jung discloses further comprising a first substrate layer (para 0064, first semiconductor layer), a second substrate layer (second semiconductor layer), and an insulation layer (not shown) disposed between the first substrate layer and the second substrate layer, the first coil being disposed on the first substrate layer (the primary inductor LP may be formed on a first semiconductor layer) and the second coil being disposed on the second substrate layer (para. 0081, inductor LS layer form on similar layer, implied different layer).
Regarding claim 28:
Jung discloses in Figs. 4 & 5, 13, radio-frequency module comprising:
a packaging substrate (para. 0090, integrated circuit and para. 0064, first substrate and second substrate);
an amplifier (amplifier 20) disposed on the packaging substrate (para. 0090, integrated circuit and one chip), the amplifier being configured to selectively operate in at least a first state and a second state; and
a tunable circuit (circuit 10) disposed on the packaging substrate, the tunable circuit including a first coil (LP1-LP3), a second coil (LS1-LS3) coupled to the first coil, and a first switch (SW2) coupled between a first portion (LS1) of the second coil and a second portion (LS3) of the second coil, the first switch being controllable to selectively couple the second portion of the second coil to the first coil.
Regarding claim 32:
Jung discloses in Figs. 4 & 5, wherein the amplifier includes a pair of amplifiers (see amplifier 20 include plurality amplifiers) configured to generate a pair of amplified signal components and the first coil is configured to receive the pair of amplified signal components.
Regarding claim 34:
Jung discloses in Figs. 4 & 5, wherein the second portion (LS3) of the second coil includes a first end that is coupled to the first switch (SW2) and a second end that is coupled to a ground (ground).
Regarding claim 35:
Jung discloses in Figs. 4 & 5, a radio-frequency module comprising:
a packaging substrate (para. 0090, integrated circuit and substrate as discussed above; and
a tunable circuit (e.g. circuit 10) disposed on the packaging substrate, the tunable circuit including a first coil (LP1-LP3), a second coil (LS1-LS3) coupled to the first coil, and a first switch (SW2) coupled between a first portion (LS1) of the second coil and a second portion (LS3) of the second coil, the first switch being controllable to selectively couple the second portion of the second coil to the first coil based on a mode of operation.
Regarding claim 39:
Jung discloses Figs. 4 & 5, further comprising a pair of amplifiers (amplifier 20 which include plurality) configured to generate a pair of amplified signal components and the first coil (LP1-LP3) is configured to receive the pair of amplified signal components.
Regarding claim 40:
Jung discloses Figs. 4 & 5, wherein the second portion (LS3) of the second coil includes a first end that is coupled to the first switch (SW2) and a second end that is coupled to a ground (ground).
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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claim(s) 33 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jung in view of Asbeck et al. (US 20220263475 A1, 2019-07-30), hereinafter, Asbeck.
Regarding claim 33:
Jung discloses the limitations as applied in claim 21 except for the amplifier and the tunable circuit are configured as a Doherty power amplifier.
Asbeck discloses in Fig. 1, a Doherty power amplifier comprising main amplifier 16 and auxiliary amplifier 16 connected to primary coil.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the circuit of Jung to have main and auxiliary amplifiers, as taught by Asbeck. Such a modification would have imparted the advantageous benefit of improving the back-off efficiency and linearity of PAs, see paragraph 0073, as taught by Asbeck to Jung reference, thereby suggesting the obviousness of such a modification.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to KHIEM D NGUYEN whose telephone number is (571)270-3941. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri 8:00 AM-5:00 PM EST.
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, Jessica Han can be reached at (571) 272-2078. 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.
/KHIEM D NGUYEN/Examiner, Art Unit 2843
Prosecution Insights