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 .
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed on 06/02/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. The Examiner appreciates the time and effort of the Applicant in the compact prosecution of this case. The Applicant argues that the prior art fails to disclose “a printed circuit board that is … disposed about a plurality of distinct sides of the antenna carrier” as set forth in Claims 1 and 11. The Examiner disagrees. The Tsai discloses a printed circuit board (PCB), 100, that is disposed about an antenna carrier, 7, comprising sides including the attached protrusion, 700, and carrier, 70, having distinct sides disposed within the receiving cavity, 64. The claim limitation that the PCB…is disposed about a plurality of distinct sides of the antenna carrier is deemed broad and has not structurally describe the relative positioning or arrangement of the PCB and the antenna carrier e.g., in Figs. 2B and 3 of the application show the printed circuit board, 300, that is … disposed directly on a plurality of distinct sides of the antenna carrier (400), with the sides orthogonal to each other.
If further efforts are made to clarify and fully define the invention, Applicant is advised to consider referencing specific paragraphs, column and line numbers, and/or figures from the cited prior art. While the citations provided are representative and mapped to individual claim limitations, other portions of the references may also be relevant. Incorporating such disclosures may assist the Applicant in preparing a more complete response to this Office Action.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 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.
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
Claims 1 and 11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Tsai et al. (US Pat. 6417812).
Regarding claim 1:
(in Figs. 4-6) an antenna system (7) for use with an RJ-style connector (6), the antenna system (7) comprising: an antenna carrier (70) comprising an RJ-style connector clearance area (defined by 64 for accommodating 7 in 6), the RJ-style connector clearance area (defined by 64 for accommodating 7 in 6) being sized to accommodate portions (defined by 60) of the RJ-style connector (6); a printed circuit board (100) that is configured to be disposed about a plurality of distinct sides (along 72 and 700) of the antenna carrier (70); and a coaxial wire (90), the coaxial wire (90) being connected with the printed circuit board (100).
Regarding claim 11:
(in Figs. 4-6) an antenna on magnetics system (defined by 6 and 7), the antenna on magnetics system (defined by 6 and 7) comprising: an RJ-style connector (6); and an antenna system (7), the antenna system (7) comprising: an antenna carrier (70) comprising an RJ-style connector clearance area (defined by 64 for accommodating 7 in 6), the RJ-style connector clearance area (defined by 64 for accommodating 7 in 6) being sized to accommodate portions (defined by 60) of the RJ-style connector (6); a printed circuit board (100) that is configured to be disposed about a plurality of distinct sides (along 72 and 700) of the antenna carrier (70); and a coaxial wire (90), the coaxial wire (90) being connected with the printed circuit board (100).
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.
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
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 2 and 12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tsai (US Pat. 6417812) in view of Tai et al. (US 20090167631).
Regarding claims 2 and 12:
Tsai discloses the antenna carrier (70) is disposed external to the RJ-style connector (6), the antenna carrier (70) comprising a top side (laterally along 700) that is oriented parallel with a top side (along 60) of the RJ-style connector (6), a back side (vertically along 72 and 700) that is oriented generally orthogonal with the top side (along 700) of the antenna carrier (70), and a bottom side (laterally along 72) that is oriented adjacent to the RJ-style connector (6) when the antenna carrier (70) is mounted thereon (see Figs.), the bottom side (laterally along 72) being parallel with the top side (laterally along 700) of the antenna carrier (70).
Tsai et al. is silent on that the antenna carrier is disposed external to the RJ-style connector.
Tai et al. disclose (in Figs. 1 and 2) the antenna carrier (40) is disposed external to the RJ-style connector (20).
Accordingly, it would have been to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to implement the antenna carrier is disposed external to the RJ-style connector as taught by Tai et al. into the device of Tsai et al. for the benefit of saving inner space of the electronic devices so many components being integrated (Para. 0006, Lines 15-17).
Claims 3-4 and 13-14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tsai (US Pat. 6417812) in view of Tai et al. (US 20090167631) as applied to claims 1-2 and 11-12 and further in view of Hsiung (US 20120001806).
Regarding claims 3 and 13:
Tsai discloses the plurality of distinct sides of the antenna carrier (70) comprises the top side of the antenna carrier (70), the back side of the antenna carrier (70), and the bottom side of the antenna carrier (70).
Tsai is silent on that the printed circuit board comprises a flexible printed circuit board.
Hsiung discloses the printed circuit board (defined by 80 and 90 – this PCB can only be a flexible PCB else the bending into the U-shape will cause breaking the PCB) comprises a flexible printed circuit board (80 and 90) and the plurality of distinct sides of the antenna carrier (70) about which the flexible printed circuit board (80 and 90) is disposed comprises the top side (along 77) of the antenna carrier (70), the back side (along 73) of the antenna carrier (70), and the bottom side (along 75) of the antenna carrier (70).
Accordingly, it would have been to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to implement the printed circuit board (PCB) comprises a flexible printed circuit board as taught by Hsiung into the PCB structure of Tsai because it is often much simpler and cost effective to modify the substrate to incorporate one or more types of antennas than it is to modify the connector itself to accomplish the desired design objectives of a compact electronic device (Para. 0005, Lines 1-8).
Regarding claims 4 and 14:
Tsai discloses the printed circuit board (100) comprises an antenna ground (connecting to the braid, 92 of the coax), the antenna ground (connecting to the braid, 92 of the coax) being located on both the back side of the antenna carrier (70) and the bottom side of the antenna carrier (70) when the printed circuit board (100) is mounted on the antenna carrier (70).
Claims 5-9 and 15-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tsai (US Pat. 6417812) in view of Tai et al. (US 20090167631) and Hsiung (US 20120001806) as applied to claims 1-4 and 11-14 above, and further in view of Begic (US 20030157903).
Regarding claims 5 and 15:
Tsai discloses the printed circuit board (100) comprises a radiator (8) located on the side of the antenna carrier (70) when the printed circuit board (100) is mounted on the antenna carrier (70).
Tsai as modified is silent on a U-shaped radiator and an L-shaped radiator, the U-shaped radiator and the L-shaped radiator being located on the top side of the antenna carrier.
Begic discloses (in Fig. 2) the printed circuit board (16) comprises a U-shaped radiator (20 adjacent to 20b) and an L-shaped radiator (20), the U-shaped radiator (20 adjacent to 20b) and the L- shaped radiator (20) being located on the top side of the antenna carrier (26) when the printed circuit board (16) is mounted on the antenna carrier (26).
Accordingly, it would have been an obvious matter of design consideration to implement the
printed circuit board comprises a U-shaped radiator and an L-shaped radiator, the U-shaped radiator and the L-shaped radiator being located on the top side of the antenna carrier when the printed circuit board is mounted on the antenna carrier as taught by Begic into the modified device of Tsai to flexibly design the length and shape of the feed and the antenna element in order to resonate the antenna at an optimal frequency within a specific range limitation and for impedance matching for maximum power transfer.
Regarding claims 6 and 16:
Tsai discloses the antenna carrier (70) comprises a connection clearance area (along 71) and a coaxial clearance ledge (along 62), the connection clearance area (along 71) and the coaxial clearance ledge (along 62) enabling the coaxial wire (90) to be attached to the printed circuit board (100) at a position below the top side of the antenna carrier (70).
Regarding claims 7 and 17:
Tsai discloses the printed circuit board (100) comprises a ground connection (connected to the
braid, 92) for the coaxial wire (90) and a feed connection (91) for the coaxial wire (90), the ground
connection (connected to the braid, 92) and the feed connection (91) being oriented orthogonal with the top side of the antenna carrier (70) when the printed circuit board (100) is mounted on the antenna carrier (70).
Regarding claims 8 and 18:
Tsai discloses the ground connection (connected to the braid, 92) for the coaxial wire (90) and the feed connection (91) for the coaxial wire (90) are also oriented orthogonal with the back side of the antenna carrier (70) when the printed circuit board (100) is mounted on the antenna carrier (70).
Regarding claim 9 and 19:
Tsai is silent on that a top portion of the U-shaped radiator extends from a left-hand portion of the printed circuit board towards a mid-line of the printed circuit board.
Begic discloses that a top portion of the U-shaped radiator (20 adjacent to 20b) extends from a left-hand portion of the printed circuit board (16) towards a mid-line of the printed circuit board (16).
Accordingly, it would have been an obvious matter of design consideration to implement the U-
shaped radiator extends from a left-hand portion of the printed circuit board towards a mid-line of the printed circuit board since the form factors for mobile communications devices are increasingly sleek and compact putting space within the device at a premium and making it difficult to accommodate multiple antennas, therefore shaped to achieve optimum space management.
Regarding claim 20:
Tsai (in Figs. 4-6) is silent on that the RJ-style connector comprises shielding and conductive foam is disposed between the RJ-style connector shielding and the antenna ground disposed on the bottom side of the antenna carrier.
Tsai (in Figs. 2-3) disclose the RJ-style connector comprises shielding (5) and conductive foam (12) is disposed between the RJ-style connector shielding (5) and the antenna ground (123) disposed on the bottom side (122) of the antenna carrier (3).
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to implement the embodiment of Figs. 2-3 instead of the embodiment of Figs. 4-6 for the ease of achieving a Universal Serial Bus connector through stacking electrical connectors and a shield with antenna assembly is mounted within (Col. 2, Lines 3-11).
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to recognize such combinations of features in embodiments especially since combining two embodiments disclosed adjacent to each other in a prior art patent does not require a leap of inventiveness and the results would have been predictable to one of ordinary skill in the art. Boston Sci. Scimed, 554 F.3d at 991.
Claim 10 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tsai (US Pat. 6417812) in view of Tai et al. (US 20090167631) and Hsiung (US 20120001806) as applied to claims 1-9, and further in view of Begic (US 20030157903) and Li et al. (US 20110187618).
Regarding claim 10:
Tsai as modified is silent on that the antenna carrier comprises one or more alignment posts, the one or more alignment posts being received within respective ones of one or more alignment holes on the printed circuit board when the printed circuit board is mounted to the antenna carrier.
Li et al. disclose the antenna carrier (40) comprises one or more alignment posts (413, 423 and 424), the one or more alignment posts (413, 423 and 424) being received within respective ones of one or more alignment holes (201) on the printed circuit board (200) when the printed circuit board (201) is mounted to the antenna carrier (40).
Accordingly, it would have been to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to implement the antenna carrier comprises one or more alignment posts, the one or more alignment posts being received within respective ones of one or more alignment holes on the printed circuit board when the printed circuit board is mounted to the antenna carrier as taught by Park into the modified device of Tsai for the benefit of providing mechanical strength and attachment means to prevent deformation if squeezed or impacted during installation and usage and improved signal integrity (Para. 0004, Lines 1-7).
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to BAMIDELE A. IMMANUEL whose telephone number is (571)272-9988. The examiner can normally be reached General IFP Schedule: Mon.-Fri. 8AM - 7PM (Hoteling).
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 5712707893. 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.
/BAMIDELE A IMMANUEL/Examiner, Art Unit 2845
/DIMARY S LOPEZ CRUZ/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2845
Prosecution Insights