CTNF 18/835,969 CTNF 95432 Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status 07-03-aia AIA 15-10-aia The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA. Election/Restrictions 08-05 AIA Claim s 6-15 withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b), as being drawn to a nonelected Species , there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Applicant timely traversed the restriction (election) requirement in the reply filed on April 14, 2026 . 08-25 AIA Applicant's election with traverse of Species I in the reply filed on April 14, 2026 is acknowledged. The traversal is on the ground(s) that “Species I-III share the same special technical feature. The first surface is coupled to a lid section and to a pivot, and the second surface is coupled to the pivot and a base section. In response to rotation of the hinge section, the pivot is to rotate the antenna section between different orientations. This configuration-linking antenna movement directly to hinge rotation through a pivoted dual-surface antenna structure-is common to all claims 1-15” and “In the Restriction Requirement, the Examiner admits that Species I-III share the technical feature of an electronic device comprising an antenna section and a hinge section. The Examiner alleges that the described technical feature does not make a contribution over the prior art in view of U.S. Pub. No. 2023/0101668 (hereinafter ‘Oh’). Applicant respectfully disagrees with the Examiner's assessment because the Examiner characterizes the shared technical feature of Species I-III with an unduly high level of generality and does not accurately reflect the claimed invention. The shared feature is not merely the presence of an antenna and hinge but, rather, the pivot- controlled dual-surface antenna structure described above, wherein the antenna section rotates between orientations in direct response to hinge rotation. This feature is common to all species and supplies the single general inventive concept linking the claims. Further, to the extent the Examiner compares the shared feature to the ‘fold over’ design described in Oh, that comparison does not accurately reflect the claimed pivot-controlled responsive antenna structure. See, e.g., Paragraphs [0071]-[0075]. As such, the requirement for restriction to a single species is improper.” . This is not found persuasive because Species I-III do not share the same claim language in describing a pivot and therefore the pivot is not a shared technical feature. Claims 6 and 11 corresponding to Species II and III do not include the limitation “The first surface is coupled to a lid section and to a pivot, and the second surface is coupled to the pivot and a base section. In response to rotation of the hinge section, the pivot is to rotate the antenna section between different orientations” as argued by the applicant and therefore do not share the common technical feature . The requirement is still deemed proper and is therefore made FINAL. Information Disclosure Statement 06-52 The information disclosure statements (IDS) submitted on August 29, 2024. The submission is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner. Specification 06-11 AIA The title of the invention is not descriptive. A new title is required that is clearly indicative of the invention to which the claims are directed. 06-11-01 AIA The following title is suggested: ANTENNA SECTIONS COUPLED TO ELECTRONIC DEVICE HINGE . Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112 07-30-02 AIA 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. 07-34-01 Claim 2 is 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. 07-34-03 AIA The term “ substantially ” in claim 2 is a relative term which renders the claim indefinite. The term “ substantially ” is not defined by the claim, the specification does not provide a standard for ascertaining the requisite degree, and one of ordinary skill in the art would not be reasonably apprised of the scope of the invention. The term modifies the limitations “within a cavity” and “outside the cavity” and renders them indefinite . 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: 07-08-aia AIA (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. 07-15 AIA Claim s 1-5 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102( a)(1 ) as being anticipated by Suprunov et al. (US PGPUB 2009/0009421 A1), hereinafter known as Suprunov . Regarding claim 1, Suprunov discloses (Fig. 5-6) An electronic device (500), comprising: a lid section (210); a base section (220) coupled to the lid section (210) via a hinge section ([0093]), the base section (220) and the lid section (210) having substantially parallel edges when in a closed position (Fig. 5); and an antenna section (310, 410, 430) including: a first surface (310) coupled to the lid section (210); and a second surface (410) coupled to the first surface (310) via a pivot and to the base section (220), wherein, in response to a rotation of the hinge section ([0093]), the pivot is to rotate the antenna section (310, 410, 430) between a first orientation when the base section and the lid section are in the closed position (Fig. 5) and a second orientation when the base section and the lid section are in an opened position (Fig. 6). Regarding claim 2, Suprunov further discloses (Fig. 5-6) wherein the antenna section (310, 410, 430) is disposed substantially within a cavity of the base section (220) in the first orientation (Fig. 5), and wherein the antenna section (310, 410, 430) is disposed substantially outside the cavity of the base section in the second orientation (Fig. 6). Regarding claim 3, Suprunov further discloses (Fig. 4-6) wherein the antenna section (310) includes multiple antennas (430, 440). Regarding claim 4, Suprunov further discloses (Fig. 4 and 6) wherein the first surface (vertical surface of 310) includes a first antenna (440) and the second surface (410) includes a second antenna (430), the first antenna (440) having a substantially perpendicular orientation to the second antenna (430). Regarding claim 5, Suprunov further discloses (Fig. 5-6) wherein, in the first orientation (Fig. 5) and in the second orientation (Fig. 6), the first surface (vertical surface of 310) and the base section (220) are to have substantially parallel edges and the second surface (410) and the lid section (210) are to have substantially parallel edges. 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 as potentially teaching all or part of the claimed invention, as well as the context of the passage 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 YONCHAN J KIM whose telephone number is (571)272-3204. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 8:00 am - 5:00 pm. 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. /DAMEON E LEVI/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2845 /YONCHAN J KIM/Examiner, Art Unit 2845 Application/Control Number: 18/835,969 Page 2 Art Unit: 2845 Application/Control Number: 18/835,969 Page 3 Art Unit: 2845 Application/Control Number: 18/835,969 Page 4 Art Unit: 2845 Application/Control Number: 18/835,969 Page 5 Art Unit: 2845 Application/Control Number: 18/835,969 Page 6 Art Unit: 2845
Prosecution Insights