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 .
Preliminary Amendment
The amendment filed 10/23/2024 pursuant to 37 CFR 1.115 and 37 CFR 1.125 was entered.
Priority
Acknowledgment is made of applicant’s claim for foreign priority under 35 U.S.C. 119 (a)-(d). Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted 10/23/2024 is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97 and being considered by the examiner.
Specification
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.
The following title is suggested: Filter and Multiplexer Having T-networks and Acoustic Resonators
Appropriate correction is required.
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 1-4, 10-13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Chinese Patent Application Publication CN 109672422 A, published 4/23/2019 (“Wang”), cited by the applicant, a machine translation of which is provided herewith.
Wang discloses in Figs. 3, 10 and the corresponding description:
PNG
media_image1.png
628
948
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Claims 1 and 10
a filter (Fig. 3, annotated) comprising:
a first port (port A),
a second port (port B) and
at least one filtering unit (components connected between Ports A and B), wherein
each filtering unit of the at least one filtering unit comprises a T network (C1, C2, C4, L3) and a resonator (11);
the T network comprises a first capacitive element (C1), a second capacitive element (C2) and a first element (C4 and/or L3); and
the first capacitive element (C1) and the second capacitive element (C2) are connected in series between the first port (A) and the second port (B), the first element is connected to a node (Fig. 3, annotated) between the first capacitive element and the second capacitive element, and the resonator (11) is connected in parallel with the T network.
Regarding claims 10-18, Wang discloses a multiplexer comprising a plurality of filters as recited in claim 1. (Figs. 3 and 10).
Claims 2 and 11
wherein the first element comprises a first inductive element (L3), a first terminal of the first inductive element is connected to the node, and a second terminal of the first inductive element serves as a third port of the filter (Fig. 3, annotated). The point of connection, as annotated, is considered a port because a signal can be provided to or taken from the filter circuit at that point. See, e.g., Steven M. Kaplan, Wiley Electrical and Electronics Engineering Dictionary, p. 591, 2004, a copy of which is provided herewith.
Claims 3 and 12
wherein the first element comprises a third capacitive element (C4), a first terminal of the third capacitive element is connected to the node, and a second terminal of the third capacitive element serves as a third port of the filter (Fig. 3).
Claims 4 and 13
wherein the first element comprises a first inductive element (L3) and a third capacitive element (C4), and a circuit formed by the first inductive element and the third capacitive element connected in series or parallel is are connected to the node (Fig. 3).
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.
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.
Claims 5 and 14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wang in view of U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2020/0136588 A1, published 4/30/2020 (“Alicioglu”).
Regarding claims 5 and 14, Wang discloses all the limitations except an LC filtering element, wherein the LC filtering element and the at least one filtering unit are connected in series between the first port and the second port.
However, Alicioglu, in the same field of endeavor, discloses an LC filtering element (450 or 460) connected in series with a filtering unit (410 and/or 420) between the first port 431 and the second port 432 (Fig. 4, ¶¶29-30).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the filter/multiplexer of Wang by adding an LC element for the benefit of matching impedance with the first and/or the second node, as taught by Alicioglu (¶30).
Claims 6, 15, 19-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wang in view of U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2017/0244382 A1, published 8/24/2017 (“Lear”).
Regarding claims 6, 15, 19-20, Wang discloses all the limitations except wherein the filter comprises at least two filtering units, and the at least two filtering units are connected in series between the first port and the second port.
However, Lear, in the same field of endeavor, discloses a cascaded filter including four filtering units (Fig. 23-24, ¶¶90-95, filtering units 20, 76, 100, 102) connected in series between the first port (OUT1) and the second port (OUT2).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the filter/multiplexer of Wang by cascading at least two filtering units for the benefit of improving the filter characteristics, as taught by Lear (¶95).
Regarding claims 7 and 16, Wang in view of Lear discloses a fourth port (IN) provided between the at least two filtering units (Lear, Fig. 23, ¶94).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the filter/multiplexer of Wang by providing a fourth port between at least two filtering units for the benefit of providing a duplexer with different filtering responses, as taught by Lear (¶94).
Claims 8 and 17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wang in view of Lear as applied to claims 6 and 15 above, and further in view of Alicioglu.
Regarding claims 8 and 17, Wang in view of Lear discloses all the limitations except an LC filtering unit connected in series between the at least two filtering units.
However, Alicioglu, in the same field of endeavor, discloses an LC filtering unit (450 or 460) connected in series with a filtering unit (410 and/or 420) between the first port 431 and the second port 432 (Fig. 4, ¶¶29-30).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the filter/multiplexer of Wang by adding an LC filtering unit of Alicioglu for the benefit of matching impedance between the filtering units, as taught by Alicioglu (¶30).
Claims 9 and 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wang in view of Lear as applied to claims 6 and 15 above, and further in view of A. Zverev, Handbook of Filter Synthesis, 1967, pp. 43-44, 488-490 (“Zverev”).
Regarding claims 9 and 18, Wang in view of Lear discloses all the limitations except wherein transmission zeros of different filtering units of the at least two filtering units correspond to equal frequencies.
However, Zverev, in the same field of endeavor, teaches cascading identical filtering sections, that is, different filtering units with transmission zeros corresponding to equal frequencies, for the benefit of improving the filter characteristics (pp. 43-44, 488-490).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the filter/multiplexer of Wang by having transmission zeros of different cascaded filtering units correspond to equal frequencies, as taught by Zverev (pp. 43-44, 488-490).
In addition, it was well-known in the art to arrange the distribution of zeros and poles to ensure equal maximum in the passband and equal minimum in the stopband of the filter. See, e.g., Zverev, p. 43. Thus, the selection of transmission zeros and corresponding frequencies would have been considered obvious design considerations known to one of ordinary skill in the art. In addition, the relative transmission zeros of different filtering units may be set (greater, smaller, equal or different) as a result of a routine, computer-based optimization to achieve the desired characteristics of the filter as known in the art (MPEP 2144.05(II)(A)) and/or simply obvious to try as there are only limited choices of the relationships (greater, smaller, same, or different). MPEP 2143(I)(E).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2017/0338801 A1, published 11/23/2017 (“Hey-Shipton”) discloses filters (Fig. 7A) and multiplexers (Fig. 11) including T networks of two capacitors in series and an inductor with an acoustic resonator in parallel with the T network (¶¶53-54, 61).
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to VICTOR COLE, telephone number (571) 272-4686. The examiner can be reached Monday-Friday, 9AM-5PM ET.
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 www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, ANDREA LINDGREN BALTZELL, can be reached at (571) 272-5918. 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 www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/patent-center for more information about Patent Center and 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.
/VICTOR COLE/
Examiner, Art Unit 2843
/ANDREA LINDGREN BALTZELL/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2843
Prosecution Insights