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 .
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on October 30, 2024. The submission is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 8 and 11-15 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.
Claim 8 recites the limitation "a resonator for the first line" in lines 11-12. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. It is unclear if this limitation is referring to the previous limitation in claim 1 or a new limitation.
Claim 8 recites the limitation "a wavelength of a radio frequency signal to be blocked in the first line" in lines 13-14. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. It is unclear if this limitation is referring to the previous limitation in claim 6 or a new limitation.
Claim 11 recites the limitation "a radio frequency signal" in lines 8-9. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. It is unclear if this limitation is referring to the previous limitation in lines 6-7 or a new limitation.
Claims 12-15 inherit the deficiencies of claim 11.
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)(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 1-10 and 16-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Shimura (US PGPUB 2017/0346188 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Shimura discloses (Fig. 1A, 2A, 8, 13A) A transmission line (Fig. 1A, 13A) configured to transfer a radio frequency signal, the transmission line comprising: a ground electrode (fourth layer; [0063]); a first line (bottom stub) disposed to face the ground electrode (fourth layer, [0063]) and constituting a microstrip line together with the ground electrode (fourth layer, [0063]); and a second line (top stub) facing the first line (bottom stub) and disposed along the first line, wherein the second line (top stub) constitutes a resonator for the first line (bottom stub), and the first line (bottom stub) is disposed between the second line (top stub) and the ground electrode (fourth layer, [0063]).
Regarding claim 2, Shimura further discloses (Fig. 8 and 11A) wherein a distance between the first line (stub in third layer) and the ground electrode (second layer; [0074]) is larger than a distance between the first line (stub in third layer) and the second line (stub in fourth layer).
Regarding claim 3, Shimura further discloses (Fig. 8 and 13A) wherein a distance between the first line (bottom stub in third layer) and the second line (top stub in second layer) is larger than a distance between the first line (bottom stub in third layer) and the ground electrode (fourth layer; [0063]).
Regarding claim 4, Shimura further discloses (Fig. 13A) wherein a line width of the first line (bottom stub in third layer) is larger than a line width of the second line (top stub in second layer).
Regarding claim 5, Shimura further discloses (Fig. 8 and 11A) wherein a line width of the second line (stub in fourth layer) is larger than a line width of the first line (stub in third layer).
Regarding claim 6, Shimura further discloses (Fig. 11A) further comprising: a first coupling electrode (electrode between the stubs) configured to couple a first end of the second line (stub in fourth layer) and the first line (stub in third layer), wherein a second end of the second line (stub in fourth layer) is an open end, and assuming a wavelength of a radio frequency signal to be blocked in the first line is denoted as λ, a length of the second line is set to a length of λ/4 ([0043]).
Regarding claim 7, Shimura further discloses (Fig. 3D) wherein the second line (stub in Fig. 3D) includes a first region including the first end of the second line (region near electrode), and a second region including the second end of the second line (region away from electrode), and a line width of the second region is larger than a line width of the first region (line width increases from first region to second region).
Regarding claim 8, Shimura further discloses (Fig. 16A) further comprising: a third line (line at connection point 2) facing the first line (bottom line at connection point 1) and disposed along the first line; and a second coupling electrode (connection point 2) configured to couple a first end of the third line (line at connection point 2) and the first line (bottom line at connection point 1), wherein the second line (top line at connection point 1) and the third line (line at connection point 2) do not overlap with each other in plan view from a normal direction of the ground electrode, a second end of the third line (line at connection point 2) is an open end, the third line (line at connection point 2) constitutes a resonator for the first line (bottom line at connection point 1), and assuming a wavelength of a radio frequency signal to be blocked in the first line is denoted as λ, a length of the third line is set to a length of λ/4 ([0038]).
Regarding claim 9, Shimura further discloses wherein both ends of the second line are open ends ([0103]), and assuming a wavelength of a radio frequency signal to be blocked in the first line is denoted as λ, a length of the second line is set to a length of λ/2 ([0103]).
Regarding claim 10, Shimura further discloses (Fig. 8) further comprising: a first substrate (core layer) to which the first line and the second line are disposed (second and third layer); and a second substrate (prepreg layer) to which the ground electrode (fourth layer) is disposed.
Regarding claim 16, Shimura further discloses (Fig. 13A) wherein a line width of the first line (bottom stub in third layer) is larger than a line width of the second line (top stub in second layer).
Regarding claim 17, Shimura further discloses (Fig. 8 and 11A) wherein a line width of the second line (stub in fourth layer) is larger than a line width of the first line (stub in third layer).
Regarding claim 18, Shimura further discloses (Fig. 11A) further comprising: a first coupling electrode (electrode between the stubs) configured to couple a first end of the second line (stub in fourth layer) and the first line (stub in third layer), wherein a second end of the second line (stub in fourth layer) is an open end, and assuming a wavelength of a radio frequency signal to be blocked in the first line is denoted as λ, a length of the second line is set to a length of λ/4 ([0043]).
Regarding claim 19, Shimura further discloses wherein both ends of the second line are open ends ([0103]), and assuming a wavelength of a radio frequency signal to be blocked in the first line is denoted as λ, a length of the second line is set to a length of λ/2 ([0103]).
Regarding claim 20, Shimura further discloses (Fig. 8) further comprising: a first substrate (core layer) to which the first line and the second line are disposed (second and third layer); and a second substrate (prepreg layer) to which the ground electrode (fourth layer) is disposed.
Claim 11 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Zhang et al. (WO 2021062789 A1), hereinafter known as Zhang.
Regarding claim 11, Zhang discloses (Fig. 3, 21, and 25) An antenna module (Fig. 25), comprising: a ground electrode (metal floor of Fig. 3); a first radiating electrode (top left 301) and a second radiating electrode (303) that are disposed to face the ground electrode (metal floor of Fig. 3) and each have a flat planar shape; a first feed line (306) configured to transfer a radio frequency signal to the first radiating electrode (top left 301); and a second feed line (306) configured to transfer a radio frequency signal to the second radiating electrode (303), wherein the second radiating electrode (303) is disposed between the first radiating electrode (top left 301) and the ground electrode (metal floor of Fig. 3), a size of the second radiating electrode (303) is larger than a size of the first radiating electrode (top left 301), each of the first feed line (306) and the second feed line (306) includes a first line (3062) disposed to face the ground electrode (metal floor of Fig. 3) and constituting a microstrip line together with the ground electrode (metal floor of Fig. 3), and a second line (3061) facing the first line (3062) and disposed along the first line (3062), the second line (3061) constitutes a resonator for the first line (3062), and the first line (3062) is disposed between the second line (3061) and the ground electrode (metal floor of 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.
Claims 12-15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zhang in view of Shimura.
Regarding claim 12, Zhang further teaches (Fig. 3 and 21) wherein each of the first feed line (306) and the second feed line (306) further includes a first via (via connected to 304) coupling a corresponding radiating electrode and the first line (3062), in each of the first feed line (306) and the second feed line (3061), a first end of the second line (3061) is coupled to the first via (via connected to 304), and a second end of the second line (3061) is an open end
but does not specifically teach and assuming a wavelength of a radio wave radiated from the first radiating electrode is denoted as λ1, and a wavelength of a radio wave radiated from the second radiating electrode is denoted as λ2, the second line of the first feed line is set to a length of λ2/4, and the second line of the second feed line is set to a length of λ1/4.
However, Shimura teaches assuming a wavelength of a radio wave radiated from the first radiating electrode is denoted as λ1, and a wavelength of a radio wave radiated from the second radiating electrode is denoted as λ2, the second line of the first feed line is set to a length of λ2/4, and the second line of the second feed line is set to a length of λ1/4 ([0043]).
It would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to modify the antenna module of Zhang with Shimura to include “assuming a wavelength of a radio wave radiated from the first radiating electrode is denoted as λ1, and a wavelength of a radio wave radiated from the second radiating electrode is denoted as λ2, the second line of the first feed line is set to a length of λ2/4, and the second line of the second feed line is set to a length of λ1/4,” as taught by Shimura, for the purpose of filtering unwanted frequency bands (see also [0043]). Such modification would have involved a mere change in the size of a component. A change in size is generally recognized as being within the level of ordinary skill in the art. In re Rose, 105 USPQ 237 (CCPA 1955). In Gardner v. TEC Syst., Inc., 725 F.2d 1338, 220 USPQ 777 (Fed. Cir. 1984), cert. denied, 469 U.S. 830, 225 USPQ 232 (1984).
Regarding claim 13, Zhang further teaches (Fig. 3 and 21) further comprising: a peripheral electrode (304) electrically coupled to the ground electrode (metal floor of Fig. 3) and extending in a first direction heading toward the first radiating electrode (top left 301) from the ground electrode (metal floor of Fig. 3), wherein in each of the first feed line (306) and the second feed line (306), the first line (3062) and the second line (3061) each extend from the first via in a direction not approaching the peripheral electrode (304).
Regarding claim 14, Zhang further teaches (Fig. 25) further comprising: a feed circuit (radio frequency chip in Fig. 25) configured to supply a radio frequency signal to the first radiating electrode and the second radiating electrode.
Regarding claim 15, Zhang further teaches (Fig. 25) a communication device (Abstract).
Conclusion
The Examiner has pointed out particular references contained in the prior art of record within the body of this action for the convenience of the Applicant. Although the specified citations are representative of the teachings in the art and are applied to the specific limitations within the individual claim, other passages and figures may apply.
Applicant, in preparing the response, should consider fully the entire reference as potentially teaching all or part of the claimed invention, as well as the context of the passage as taught by the prior art or disclosed by the Examiner.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to YONCHAN J KIM whose telephone number is (571)272-3204. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 8:00 am - 5:00 pm.
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.
/DAMEON E LEVI/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2845
/YONCHAN J KIM/Examiner, Art Unit 2845
Prosecution Insights