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 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.
Claim(s) 1-3, 5-13 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 2019/0288402 (“Rashidian” or “R”) in view of US 4370657 (“Kaloi” or “K”)
1: R teaches a radiofrequency (RF) module (100), comprising: a primary board (110); a controller (124) supported by the primary board (as shown); and an antenna assembly (150) supported by the primary board and connected with the controller (as shown), the antenna assembly including: an array of antenna elements (that of the 224s), each antenna element having: an active patch (the 224s).
However, R fails to teach that each element has a passive patch separated from the active patch by a slot; wherein one of the active patch and the passive patch has a greater surface area than the other of the active patch and the passive patch.
Nevertheless, K teaches an antenna element (that of fig 2A) having an active patch (31) and a passive patch (32) separated from the active patch (as shown) by a slot (the space between 31 and 32).
It would have been obvious to replace R’s 224s with K’s antenna elements. The motivation would have been to obtain improved directivity.
2: The modified device of claim 1 would be such that the active patch and the passive patch include a set of edges defining a rectangular perimeter (as shown in fig 2A of K).
3: The modified device of claim 1 would be such that the slot extends from a first side of the rectangular perimeter to a second side of the rectangular perimeter (as shown in fig 2A of K).
5: The modified device of claim 1 would be such that the slot extends from a first portion of a first side of the rectangular perimeter to a second portion of the first side (as shown in fig 2A of K).
6: The modified device of claim 1 would be such that the active patch has a single edge on the rectangular perimeter, and at least one further edge inside the rectangular perimeter (as shown in fig 2A of K).
7: The modified device of claim 1 would be such that the active patch has an edge that is colinear with an edge of the passive patch (as shown in fig 2A of K).
8: R teaches that the antenna assembly is integrated with the primary board (as shown).
9: R teaches that the primary board includes a plurality of layers (as shown in fig 2A of R); and the modified device of claim 1 would such that the active patch and the passive patch of each antenna element are contained in the same layer of the primary board (as shown in fig 2A of K, all components of the antenna element are on the same layer).
10: The modified device of claim 1 would be such that the active patch has a greater surface area than the passive patch (as shown in fig 2a of K).
11: R teaches that the antenna assembly further includes: a plurality of subarray dividers each connected with a respective subset of the antenna elements (each element has its own 216 and 228, as shown, which separate each of the elements).
12: R teaches a communications interface (104) on an upper surface of the primary board (as shown).
13: R teaches that the communications interface comprises a Universal Serial Bus (USB) interface (0011).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 4 is 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.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to GRAHAM P SMITH whose telephone number is (571)270-1568. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 10am - 6pm.
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.
/GRAHAM P SMITH/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2845