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 .
Specification
The disclosure is objected to because of the following informalities: The application (para [0039]) defines parasitic patches (11) fed by feed structure (4) and radiation patches (12) being coupled to the parasitic patch. Applicant’s nomenclature or terminology is not consistent with standard antenna terms and definitions in that patches fed by feed structures are radiation or driven patches (not parasitic patches) and parasitic patches (not radiation patches) are fed by coupling to the radiation patches. Such recitations occurred numerous times throughout the specification. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Objections
Claims 1, 2, 4, 5, 7, 11-20 are objected to because of the following informalities:
Claim 1, lines 8-10 recites “the at least one feed structure… is electrically connected to the at least one parasitic patch, the at least one parasitic patch is coupled to the at least one radiation patch”. Applicant’s nomenclature or terminology is not consistent with standard antenna definitions in that patches fed by feed structures are radiation or driven patches (not parasitic patches) and parasitic patches (not radiation patches) are fed by coupling to the radiation patches. Claims 2, 4, 5, 7, 11-15 and 17-20 recites similar terminology. Appropriate correction is required.
For examination purposes, Examiner will refer applicant’s “parasitic patches” as radiation patches and applicant’s “radiation patches” as parasitic patches.
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, 2, 11-13, 16 and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Hu Wei et al “Wideband Circularly Polarized Microstrip Patch Antenna with Multimode Resonance”, IEEE Antennas and Wireless Propagation Letters, IEEE, Piscataway, NJ, US, vol. 20, no. 4, 2 February 2021 (2021-02-02), pages 533-537, XP011848148, ISSN: 1536-1225, DOI:10.1109/LAWP.2021.3056404), hereinafter Hu Wei. (Applicant’s cited prior art).
Regarding claim 1, Hu Wei (Figures 1(a) and 1(b), section II.A) teaches an antenna unit comprising:
a radiation assembly comprising at least one “radiation patch” (driven patch) and at least one “parasitic patch”;
a dielectric layer comprising a layer of dielectric substrate (FR4 substrate and Rogers RO4003);
a floor layer (ground layer); and
at least one feed structure (four-feed network probe feed),
wherein the radiation assembly is located on a top surface of the dielectric layer;
the floor layer is located on a bottom surface of the dielectric layer; and
the least one feed structure passes through the floor layer and the dielectric layer sequentially and is electrically connected to the at least one “radiation patch”, and the at least one “radiation patch” is coupled to the at least one “parasitic patch”.
Regarding claim 2, as applied to claim 1, Hu Wei (Figures 1(a) and 1(b)) teaches that the at least one “radiation patch” (driven patch) extends into a rectangular shape along a first direction, a first edge of the at least one “parasitic patch” extends along the first direction, the at least one “radiation patch” and the at least one “parasitic patch” are spaced apart along a second direction, and the second direction is perpendicular to the first direction, such that the at least one “radiation patch” and the first edge define a coupling gap, and an extension direction of the coupling gap is parallel to the first direction.
Regarding claim 11, as applied to claim 1, Hu Wei (Figures 1(a) and 1(b)) teaches that the radiation assembly further comprises at least one short-circuit probe (shorting pin), a top end of the at least one short-circuit probe is electrically connected to the at least one “parasitic patch”, and a bottom end of the at least one short-circuit probe passes through the dielectric layer and is electrically connected to the floor layer.
Regarding claim 12, as applied to claim 11, Hu Wei (Figures 1(a) and 1(b)) teaches that each “parasitic patch” corresponds to one short-circuit probe (shorting pin), and the short-circuit probe is arranged in a middle part of the “parasitic patch”.
Regarding claim 13, as applied to claim 11, Hu Wei (Figures 1(a) and 1(b)) teaches that each “parasitic patch” corresponds to two short-circuit probes, and the two short-circuit probes are symmetrically arranged on the radiation patch along the first direction.
Regarding claim 16, as applied to claim 1, Hu Wei (Figures 1(a) and 1(b)) teaches that the top surface of the dielectric layer is square; and the radiation assembly comprises four patch assemblies, each patch assembly comprises one “radiation patch” and one “parasitic patch”; two of the four patch assemblies are symmetrically arranged along a diagonal of the top surface as a first patch assembly and a second patch assembly; the other two of the four patch assemblies are symmetrically arranged along another diagonal of the top surface as a third patch assembly and a fourth patch assembly; the first patch assembly and the second patch assembly are configured for excitation of a +45° polarization signal, and the third patch assembly and the fourth patch assembly are configured for excitation of a -45° polarization signal.
Regarding claim 20, Hu Wei (Figures 1(a) and 1(b)) teaches an electronic device comprising:
an antenna unit comprising:
a radiation assembly comprising at least one “radiation patch” (driven patch) and at least one “parasitic patch”;
a dielectric layer comprising a layer of dielectric substrate (FR4 substrate and Rogers RO4003);
a floor layer (ground layer); and
at least one feed structure (four-feed network probe feed),
wherein the radiation assembly is located on a top surface of the dielectric layer;
the floor layer is located on a bottom surface of the dielectric layer; and
the least one feed structure passes through the floor layer and the dielectric layer sequentially and is electrically connected to the at least one “radiation patch”, and the at least one “radiation patch” is coupled to the at least one “parasitic patch”.
Claims 1 and 15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Zhang et al (CN 101710649B), hereinafter Zhang.
Regarding claim 1, Zhang (Figures 1 and 2) teaches an antenna unit comprising:
a radiation assembly comprising at least one “radiation patch” 1 and at least one “parasitic patch” 2;
a dielectric layer 3/6 comprising a layer of dielectric substrate;
a floor layer 7; and
at least one feed structure 4,
wherein the radiation assembly is located on a top surface of the dielectric layer;
the floor layer is located on a bottom surface of the dielectric layer; and
the least one feed structure passes through the floor layer and the dielectric layer sequentially and is electrically connected to the at least one “radiation patch”, and the at least one “radiation patch” is coupled to the at least one “parasitic patch”.
Regarding claim 15, as applied to claim 1, Zhang (Figure 2) teaches that the feed structure comprises a coaxial feeder, an inner conductor 8 of the coaxial feeder is electrically connected to the at least one “radiation patch”, and an outer conductor of the coaxial feeder is electrically connected to the floor layer.
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 3-6, 14, 18 and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hu Wei.
Regarding claim 3, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to arbitrary configure a ratio of the size of the coupling gap along the first direction and the size of the coupling gap along the second direction to range from 5 to 10, since it has been held that discovering an optimum value of a result effective variable involves only routine skill in the art. In re Boesch, 617 F.2d 272, 205 USPQ 215 (CCPA 1980).
Regarding claim 4, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to arbitrary configure the ratio of the size of the “radiation patch” along the first direction and the size of the first edge along the first direction to range from 1 to 2, since it has been held that discovering an optimum value of a result effective variable involves only routine skill in the art. In re Boesch, 617 F.2d 272, 205 USPQ 215 (CCPA 1980).
Regarding claim 5, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to arbitrary configure the ratio of the size of the coupling gap along the first direction and the size of the coupling gap along the second direction to range from 5 to 10; and the ratio of a size of the parasitic patch along the first direction and a size of the first edge along the first direction to range from 1 to 2, since it has been held that discovering an optimum value of a result effective variable involves only routine skill in the art. In re Boesch, 617 F.2d 272, 205 USPQ 215 (CCPA 1980).
Regarding claim 6, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to arbitrary configure a value of a thickness D1 of the dielectric substrate ranges from 0.8mm to 1.2mm, since it has been held that discovering an optimum value of a result effective variable involves only routine skill in the art. In re Boesch, 617 F.2d 272, 205 USPQ 215 (CCPA 1980).
Regarding claim 14, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to arbitrary configure a diameter of the short-circuit probe to be ϕ1, and a size of the radiation patch along the first direction is L4, wherein a value of ϕ1/L4 ranges from 0.15 to 0.21; and when two short-circuit probes are provided, a distance between the two short-circuit probes is L5, wherein a value of ϕ1/L5 ranges from 0.2 to 0.4, since it has been held that discovering an optimum value of a result effective variable involves only routine skill in the art. In re Boesch, 617 F.2d 272, 205 USPQ 215 (CCPA 1980).
Regarding claim 18, Hu Wei teaches the claimed invention, as applied to claim 16, wherein the feed structure comprises a first feed structure (top feed), a second feed structure (bottom feed), a third feed structure (left feed) and a fourth feed structure (right feed); the first feed structure is electrically connected to the “radiation patch” of the first patch assembly; the second feed structure is electrically connected to the “radiation patch” of the second patch assembly, the third feed structure is electrically connected to the “radiation patch” of the third patch assembly; and the fourth feed structure is electrically connected to the “radiating patch” of the fourth patch assembly.
It would have been an obvious matter of design choice to select the specific feeding parameters such as feed amplitudes of the first feed structure and the second feed structure are identical, and a feed phase difference is 180°; and feed amplitudes of the third feed structure and the fourth feed structure are identical, and a feed phase difference is 180° to effectively increase the bandwidth of the antenna.
Regarding claim 19, Hu Wei (Figures 1(a) and 1(b)) teaches an antenna array comprising:
a radiation assembly comprising at least one “radiating patch” (driven patch) and at least one “parasitic patch”;
a dielectric layer comprising a layer of dielectric substrate (FR4 substrate and Rogers RO4003);
a floor layer (ground layer); and
at least one feed structure (four-feed network feed probe),
wherein the radiation assembly is located on a top surface of the dielectric layer;
the floor layer is located on a bottom surface of the dielectric layer; and
the least one feed structure passes through the floor layer and the dielectric layer sequentially and is electrically connected to the at least one “radiation patch”, and the at least one “radiation patch” is coupled to the at least one “parasitic patch”.
Hu Wei does not explicitly mention the configuration comprising at least two antenna units, wherein the at least two antenna units are arranged in an array, and floor layers of adjacent two antenna units are separated by a fracture.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide antenna of Hu Wei in the configuration of an array to improve gain.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 7-10 and 17 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
Regarding claim 7, Hu Wei fails to further teach that each “parasitic patch” comprises a rectangular area and an edge trimming area connected along the second direction; and the rectangular area is close to the “radiation patch”, the first edge is one of right-angled edges of the rectangular area, the edge trimming area is connected to a second edge of the rectangular area, the second edge is opposite to the first edge along the second direction, and a size of the edge trimming area along the first direction decreases in a direction away from the “radiation patch”.
Claims 8-10 would have been found allowable for at least the reason for depending, either directly or indirectly, on claim 7.
Regarding claim 17, Hu Wei fails to further teach that the “parasitic patch” comprises a rectangular area and an edge trimming area, and the edge trimming area is an isosceles triangle; vertex angles of the four edge trimming areas in the four patch assemblies are opposite, a cross-shaped gap is defined between the four edge trimming areas, and a center of the cross-shaped gap coincides with a center of the top surface.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure:
Cao et al (CN 215600567U) discloses an antenna unit comprising a radiation patch and a parasitic patch disposed on a top surface of a substrate.
Tan et al (CN 107359407A) discloses an antenna unit comprising a radiation patch and a parasitic patch disposed on a top surface of a substrate.
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