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 .
Claim Objections
Claims 21, 24, and 27 are objected to because of the following informalities:
Claim 21 recites “wherein the first antenna element comprises a first feed line extending between the first antenna feed and a bifurcation and two first antenna arms”. It is unclear based on the specification how the first feed line would extend between these three elements. Based on the specification, it appears that this is a grammar issue, and was meant to state “wherein the first antenna element comprises a first feed line extending between the first antenna feed and a bifurcation, and two first antenna arms”.
Claim 24 recites “a third feed line extending between the third antenna feed and a connection position and a generally T-shaped part”. It is unclear based on the specification how the third feed line would extend between these three elements. Based on the specification, it appears that this is a grammar issue, and was meant to state “a third feed line extending between the third antenna feed and a connection position, and a generally T-shaped part”.
Claim 27 recites “a second feed line extending between the second feed and a connection position and an end part”. It is unclear based on the specification how the second feed line would extend between these three elements. Based on the specification, it appears that this is a grammar issue, and was meant to state “a second feed line extending between the second feed and a connection position, and an end part”.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
Claims 16-30 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.
The term “vicinity” in claim 16 is a relative term which renders the claim indefinite. The term “vicinity” 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.
Claims 17-30 are dependent on claim 16, and therefore also rejected.
Claim 22 uses the term “generally in an L-shape”. Claim 23 uses the term “generally in a curled shape”. Claim 24 uses the term “generally T-shaped part”. Claim 28 uses the term “generally U-shaped”. The term “generally” in these claims renders the claims indefinite because it is unclear whether the parts actually have to be L-shaped, curled shaped, T-shaped, or U-shaped, and the specification does not provide a standard for ascertaining what qualifies as being “generally”, and one of ordinary skill in the art would not be reasonably apprised of the scope of the invention.
Claims 25-26 are dependent on claim 24, and therefore also rejected.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
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.
(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.
Claims 16-17, 20-22, 24-29 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) and (a)(2) as being anticipated by Hsieh et al. (US 2015/0180115, hereby referred as Hsieh).
Regarding claim 16, as best understood, Hsieh teaches the following:
an antenna arrangement (figures 2-3) comprising:
a dielectric substrate with a first surface and second surface extending between a first edge and second edge of the substrate (as shown in figures 2-3, “The first antenna 200, the second antenna 210, and the third antenna 220 are disposed on a same substrate”, paragraph [0024]; “the substrate on which the radio-frequency device 20 is set may be a printed circuit board (PCB) or other kind of substrate”, paragraph [0028]);
a conductive pattern arranged on the first surface of said substrate (as shown in figures 6-7, “the substrate on which the radio-frequency device 20 is set may be a printed circuit board (PCB) or other kind of substrate”, paragraph [0028]), the pattern forming:
a first antenna element (the combination of elements 206 and 207, figures 2-3) arranged in the vicinity of the first edge, connected to a first antenna feed (element 208, figures 2-3);
a second antenna element (element 220, figures 2-3) arranged in the vicinity of the second edge, connected to a second antenna feed (element 228, figures 2-3);
a third antenna element (element 210, figures 2-3) arranged between the first and second antenna elements, connected to a third antenna feed (element 218, figures 2-3);
an intermediate element (element 230, figures 2-3), at least partly functioning as a ground layer, arranged between said first, second and third antenna elements (as shown in figures 2-3); and
a non-conductive zone (the area between elements 206/208 and 230, figures 2-3) separating the first antenna element and the intermediate element (as shown in figures 2-3);
wherein the second antenna element and the intermediate element are in conductive contact with each other (by way of element 226, figures 2-3).
Regarding claim 17, as best understood, Hsieh as referred in claim 16 teaches the following:
wherein the third antenna element (element 210, figures 2-3) is arranged closer to the second antenna element (element 220, figures 2-3) than to the first antenna element (the combination of elements 206 and 207, figures 2-3).
Regarding claim 20, as best understood, Hsieh as referred in claim 16 teaches the following:
wherein the third antenna element (element 210, figures 2-3) is arranged for communication over at least one of an IEEE 802.11 and Bluetooth standard (“the second antenna 210 … may be used for transmitting or receiving signals of a Wi-Fi communication system”, paragraph [0022]).
Regarding claim 21, as best understood, Hsieh as referred in claim 16 teaches the following:
wherein the first antenna element comprises a first feed line (element 207, figures 2-3) extending between the first antenna feed (element 208, figures 2-3) and a bifurcation (point where element 207 connects to element 206, figures 2-3) and two first antenna arms extending from said bifurcation in at least partly different directions (element 206 has two arms extending in different directions from the connection point of 207, as shown in figures 2-3).
Regarding claim 22, as best understood, Hsieh as referred in claim 21 teaches the following:
wherein one of said first antenna arms extends generally in an L-shape (as shown in figures 2-3).
Regarding claim 24, as best understood, Hsieh as referred in claim 16 teaches the following:
wherein the third antenna element comprises a third feed line (Feed line, as shown in figure 2 below) extending between the third antenna feed (element 218, figures 2-3) and a connection position and a generally T-shaped part (the combination of the Shaft and Beam, figure 2 as shown below), wherein a free end of a shaft of the T-shaped part is connected to said third feed line (as shown in figures 2-3), and wherein the other end of the shaft is connected to an overlying beam (Beam, figure 2 as shown below), the beam having two arms connected to the shaft and extending in essentially opposite directions (as shown in figures 2-3).
PNG
media_image1.png
386
602
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 25, as best understood, Hsieh as referred in claim 24 teaches the following:
wherein one arm of the beam (element 216 portion of Beam, figures 2-3) is connected to the intermediate element (element 230, figures 2-3), whereas the other arm forms a free end (free end of element 212 of Beam, figures 2-3).
Regarding claim 26, as best understood, Hsieh as referred in claim 24 teaches the following:
wherein the beam is displaced in relation to the shaft, with one beam arm extending farther from the shaft than the other beam arm (as shown in figures 2-3, the Beam is displaced in relation to the Shaft so one arm extends farther than the other).
Regarding claim 27, as best understood, Hsieh as referred in claim 16 teaches the following:
wherein the second antenna element (element 220, figures 2-3) comprises a second feed line (portion extending between 228 and Junction, figure 2 as shown below) extending between the second feed (element 228, figures 2-3) and a connection position (Junction, figure 2 as shown below) and an end part (element 222, figures 2-3), wherein the junction between the second feed line and the end part forms an angle, and preferably an essentially right angle (as shown in figures 2-3).
PNG
media_image2.png
424
640
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 28, as best understood, Hsieh as referred in claim 27 teaches the following:
wherein the end part is generally U-shaped (element 222 which extends until the Junction, figures 2-3), with one of the ends being connected to the second feed line (portion extending between 228 and Junction, figure 2 as shown above).
Regarding claim 29, as best understood, Hsieh as referred in claim 27 teaches the following:
wherein the second antenna element is further connected to the intermediate part (element 230, figures 2-3) at said junction between said second feed line and said end part (by way of element 226, figures 2-3).
Claims 16, 21, 23 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) and (a)(2) as being anticipated by Hsieh (US 2016/0294046).
Regarding claim 16, as best understood, Hsieh teaches the following:
an antenna arrangement (figures 6-7) comprising:
a dielectric substrate with a first surface and second surface extending between a first edge and second edge of the substrate (as shown in figures 6-7, “The first antenna 200, the second antenna 210, and the third antenna 220 are disposed on a same substrate”, paragraph [0025]; “the substrate on which the radio-frequency device 20 is set may be a printed circuit board (PCB) or other kind of substrate”, paragraph [0038]);
a conductive pattern arranged on the first surface of said substrate (as shown in figures 6-7, “the substrate on which the radio-frequency device 20 is set may be a printed circuit board (PCB) or other kind of substrate”, paragraph [0038]), the pattern forming:
a first antenna element (the combination of elements 612/614, figures 6-7) arranged in the vicinity of the first edge, connected to a first antenna feed (element 618, figures 6-7);
a second antenna element (element 600, figures 6-7) arranged in the vicinity of the second edge, connected to a second antenna feed (element 608, figures 6-7);
a third antenna element (element 620, figures 6-7) arranged between the first and second antenna elements, connected to a third antenna feed (element 628, figures 6-7);
an intermediate element (element 630, figures 6-7), at least partly functioning as a ground layer, arranged between said first, second and third antenna elements (as shown in figures 6-7); and
a non-conductive zone (the area between elements 612/614 and 630, figures 6-7) separating the first antenna element and the intermediate element (as shown in figures 6-7);
wherein the second antenna element and the intermediate element are in conductive contact with each other (by way of element 604, figures 6-7).
Regarding claim 21, as best understood, Hsieh as referred in claim 16 teaches the following:
wherein the first antenna element comprises a first feed line (portion that’s between 618 and 612/614, figures 6-7) extending between the first antenna feed (element 618, figures 6-7) and a bifurcation (point where element 618 connects to between 612/614, figures 2-3) and two first antenna arms extending from said bifurcation in at least partly different directions (element 614 is one arm and 612 is another arm, as shown in figures 6-7).
Regarding claim 23, as best understood, Hsieh as referred in claim 21 teaches the following:
wherein one of said first antenna arms extends generally in a curled shape (element 612, figures 6-7).
Claims 16 and 30 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) and (a)(2) as being anticipated by Huang et al. (US 2008/0158068, hereby referred as Huang).
Regarding claim 16, as best understood, Huang teaches the following:
an antenna arrangement (figures 1-2) comprising:
a dielectric substrate with a first surface and second surface extending between a first edge and second edge of the substrate (as shown in figures 1-3, “a rectangular circuit substrate 1 made by the fiberglass material, FR4, which is dielectric constant”, paragraph [0037]);
a conductive pattern arranged on the first surface of said substrate (as shown in figures 1-2, “omni-directional antenna 11 and a side antenna set 12, which are configured symmetrically in both sides of the omni-directional antenna 1”, paragraph [0037]), the pattern forming:
a first antenna element (elements 21-25 of element 13, figures 1-2) arranged in the vicinity of the first edge, connected to a first antenna feed (element 21, figures 1-2);
a second antenna element (element 14, figures 1-2) arranged in the vicinity of the second edge, connected to a second antenna feed (element corresponding to element 21, figures 1-2, “a side antenna set 12, which are configured symmetrically”, paragraph [0037]);
a third antenna element (element 11, figures 1-2) arranged between the first and second antenna elements, connected to a third antenna feed (element that connects to the center feed line, figure 1);
an intermediate element (grounding element which is the white solid elements, not including the feeding lines, figures 1-2, which is what elements 26 are connected to), at least partly functioning as a ground layer (paragraph [0037]), arranged between said first, second and third antenna elements (as shown in figures 1-2); and
a non-conductive zone (the area between elements 21-25 and the intermediate elements, figures 1-2) separating the first antenna element and the intermediate element (as shown in figures 1-2);
wherein the second antenna element and the intermediate element are in conductive contact with each other (by way of element 26, figures 1-2, paragraph [0037]).
Regarding claim 30, as best understood, Huang as referred in claim 16 teaches the following:
wherein the first, second and third antenna feeds are all arranged on a common straight line (as shown in figure 1, the bottom edge of the substrate has all the feeds on a straight line).
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 18-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hsieh et al. (US 2015/0180115, hereby referred as Hsieh) in view of Ananthanarayanan et al. (US 9337539, hereby referred as Ana).
Regarding claim 18, as best understood, Hsieh as referred in claim 16 teaches the antenna arrangement with the exception for the following:
wherein the first antenna element is arranged for radio communication over at least one of a 3G, 4G, 5G and LTE standard.
However, Hsieh does teach that “the shape of the … plate 206…may be stretched or changed along the x-, y-, or z-axis, and is not limited to that shown in FIG. 2” (paragraph [0028]). Hsieh also teaches that “the antenna radiation frequency, bandwidth and efficiency are closely correlated with the antenna shape and the materials used in the antenna. Therefore, designers may appropriately modify, for example, the dimensions, width, and spacing of the elements/units/components in the antennas 200, 210, 220, 600, and 610 to comply with requirements of the wireless communication systems” (paragraph [0031]). Hsieh also teaches that the antenna arrangement is implemented into a wireless communication device (paragraphs [0008]-[0009]).
Ana suggests a similar wireless communication device that includes antennas that provide “Long Term Evolution (LTE) frequency bands, third generation (3G) frequency bands, Wi-Fi® and Bluetooth® frequency bands or other wireless local area network (WLAN) frequency bands, wide area network (WAN) frequency bands, global navigation satellite system (GNSS) frequency bands (e.g., positioning system (GPS) frequency bands, or the like” (column 2, lines 40-46).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to have the first antenna element of Hsieh to be arranged for at least one of a 3G, 4G, 5G and LTE standard as suggested by the teachings of Hsieh and Ana in order to order to allow the wireless communication device to receive LTE standard signals, which is a very commonly used band for wireless communication devices, so it can provide quicker wireless data rates, which is desired in wireless communication devices.
Regarding claim 19, as best understood, Hsieh as referred in claim 16 teaches the antenna arrangement with the exception for the following:
wherein the second antenna element is arranged for GNSS radio communication.
However, Hsieh does teach that “the shape of the …the fourth radiating element 222, or the fifth radiating element 224 may be stretched or changed along the x-, y-, or z-axis, and is not limited to that shown in FIG. 2” (paragraph [0028]). Hsieh also teaches that “the antenna radiation frequency, bandwidth and efficiency are closely correlated with the antenna shape and the materials used in the antenna. Therefore, designers may appropriately modify, for example, the dimensions, width, and spacing of the elements/units/components in the antennas 200, 210, 220, 600, and 610 to comply with requirements of the wireless communication systems” (paragraph [0031]). Hsieh also teaches that the antenna arrangement is implemented into a wireless communication device (paragraphs [0008]-[0009]).
Ana suggests a similar wireless communication device that includes antennas that provide “Long Term Evolution (LTE) frequency bands, third generation (3G) frequency bands, Wi-Fi® and Bluetooth® frequency bands or other wireless local area network (WLAN) frequency bands, wide area network (WAN) frequency bands, global navigation satellite system (GNSS) frequency bands (e.g., positioning system (GPS) frequency bands, or the like” (column 2, lines 40-46).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to have the second antenna element of Hsieh to be arranged for GNSS radio communication as suggested by the teachings of Hsieh and Ana in order to allow the wireless communication device to receive GNSS signals, , which is a very commonly used band for wireless communication devices, so it can provide global navigation to a user, which is desired in wireless communication devices.
Additional Comments
Both Hsieh (US 2016/0294046) and Huang et al. (US 2008/0158068) could be used to reject more dependent claims than what was explained above.
While all the current claims are rejected, the examiner does see the differences between the prior art and the disclosed invention. But most of the claims are only dependent on claim 16. If a combination, for example 21/23 and 27/28/29; or 18-20 and 30, where incorporated into claim 1, it would overcome the current prior art of record.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to AB SALAM ALKASSIM JR whose telephone number is (571)270-0449. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Thursday.
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.
/AB SALAM ALKASSIM JR/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2845