Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/918,079

RFID TAG AND ANTENNA PATTERN

Non-Final OA §103
Filed
Oct 17, 2024
Examiner
LEE, SEUNG H
Art Unit
2876
Tech Center
2800 — Semiconductors & Electrical Systems
Assignee
Toppan Holdings Inc.
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
87%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
2y 2m
To Grant
98%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 87% — above average
87%
Career Allow Rate
1030 granted / 1179 resolved
+19.4% vs TC avg
Moderate +11% lift
Without
With
+11.0%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 2m
Avg Prosecution
35 currently pending
Career history
1214
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
2.1%
-37.9% vs TC avg
§103
33.0%
-7.0% vs TC avg
§102
36.1%
-3.9% vs TC avg
§112
13.3%
-26.7% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 1179 resolved cases

Office Action

§103
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 8-11 are objected to because of the following informalities: Claims 8-10 are depended on claim 2. However, the examiner will consider that claims 8-10 are depended on claim 7. Appropriate correction is required. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103 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 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) 1-5, 7-10, and 12 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Forster et al. (US 2006/0055542). Re claims 1-5: Forster teaches an antenna pattern (fig. 1) comprising a base material (14), and a dipole antenna (12) formed in a band shape, made of a conductive material on a front surface of the base material, and extending linearly (fig. 2), wherein the dipole antenna has a connection portion (42, 44) positioned in a middle of the dipole antenna in a longitudinal direction, and to which an IC chip (20) is connected, and a pair of long sides (i.e., upper and lower portion of the antenna element 21 and 22) of the dipole antenna positioned at both ends of the dipole antenna in a width direction and extending in the longitudinal direction of the dipole antenna, wherein the waveform shapes of the pair of long sides are formed line symmetric with respect to a center line extending in the longitudinal direction in the middle of the dipole antenna in the width direction (fig. 2), and a pair of short sides of the dipole antenna positioned at both ends in the longitudinal direction and extending in the width direction are positioned to correspond to vertices of antenna (fig. 2), wherein a pair of short sides (i.e., distal ends (56, 58)) of the dipole antenna positioned at both ends in the longitudinal direction and extending in the width direction are formed (fig. 2) (see figs. 1, 2; paragraphs 0056-0066). However, he fails to particularly teach that the dipole antenna are formed in waveform shapes in which a plurality of concave and convex shapes are arranged in the longitudinal direction. It would have been obvious design variation well within one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention was made to modify the design of the antenna of Forster to receive/transmit signal therewith. In fact, the applicant admit that the antenna can be any form factor including a triangular shape or a rectangular shape having a straight line as concave and convex portion (see paragraph 0024 of the specification of the instant application), and therefore an obvious expedient. Re claims 7-10: Forster teaches an RFID tag (10) comprising the antenna pattern (12) according to Claim 1; and an IC chip (20) connected to the connection portion (see figs. 1, 2; paragraphs 0056-0066). However, he fails to particularly teach that the dipole antenna are formed in waveform shapes in which a plurality of concave and convex shapes are arranged in the longitudinal direction. It would have been obvious design variation well within one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention was made to modify the design of the antenna of Forster to receive/transmit signal therewith. In fact, the applicant admit that the antenna can be any form factor including a triangular shape or a rectangular shape having a straight line as concave and convex portion (see paragraph 0024 of the specification of the instant application), and therefore an obvious expedient. Re claim 12: Forster teaches an RFID tag (10) comprising the antenna pattern (12) according to Claim 2; and an IC chip (20) connected to the connection portion (see figs. 1, 2; paragraphs 0056-0066). Allowable Subject Matter Claims 6 and 11 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: None of prior art teaches the antenna pattern comprising the dipole antenna formed in a band shape wherein a cavity is formed inside a peripheral edge of the dipole antenna as set forth in the claims. Conclusion The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Forster et al. (EP 3938959), Escaro et al. (US 2020/0373674), and Hayama et al. (US 2007/02300782) teach RFID tags having antenna. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SEUNG H LEE whose telephone number is (571)272-2401. The examiner can normally be reached 7-4:00PM. 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, Steven Paik can be reached at 571-272-2404. 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. /SEUNG H LEE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2876
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Oct 17, 2024
Application Filed
Dec 31, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §103
Feb 24, 2026
Interview Requested
Apr 02, 2026
Applicant Interview (Telephonic)
Apr 03, 2026
Examiner Interview Summary
Apr 06, 2026
Response Filed

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12592483
SHIELD CAN HAVING ANTENNA FUNCTION AND ELECTRONIC MODULE COMPRISING SAME
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12586906
ANTENNA PACKAGE USING BALL ATTACH ARRAY TO CONNECT ANTENNA AND BASE SUBSTRATES
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12580610
RECONFIGURABLE INTELLIGENT SURFACE (RIS) ANTENNA AND RIS ANTENNA UNIT
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
Patent 12573744
WIDEBAND ANTENNAS IN GLASS THROUGH DIRECT VIA FEEDING AND GLASS STACKING
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 10, 2026
Patent 12573743
MILLIMETER WAVE (MMW) INTEGRATED HINGE
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 10, 2026
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

AI Strategy Recommendation

Get an AI-powered prosecution strategy using examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Powered by AI — typically takes 5-10 seconds

Prosecution Projections

1-2
Expected OA Rounds
87%
Grant Probability
98%
With Interview (+11.0%)
2y 2m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 1179 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allow rate.

Sign in with your work email

Enter your email to receive a magic link. No password needed.

Personal email addresses (Gmail, Yahoo, etc.) are not accepted.

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month