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 Rejections - 35 USC § 112
Claims 1-20 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.
Claims 1 and 11 recite the lens/lenses being attached or disposed on a rear surface of the transceiver chip. However, no context for determination of the “rear” of the chip has been recited. As such, the structure of the apparatus is found to be indefinite.
Additional claims are rejected at least for their dependence upon the above rejected claims.
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.
Claim(s) 11, 14, 15, 16, 18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Rieder (US 2022/0359328).
Claim 11: Reider discloses A radar on-chip antenna apparatus comprising: a transceiving chip disposed in a substrate to process a radar signal (para 0025); a transmitting antenna and a receiving antenna built into the transceiving chip and configured to transmit the radar signal and to receive the radar signal (para 0025), respectively; and a lens portion attached to a rear surface of the transceiving chip (para 0033-0037)
Claim 14: Reider discloses the transmitting antenna and the receiving antenna are of a rear-radiating type (fig 1, para 0028, 0029)
Claim 15: Reider discloses the transmitting antenna and the receiving antenna are disposed at a portion in the transceiving chip where interference therebetween is minimal (para 0028, 0029, 0033-0037)
Claim 16: Reider discloses the transmitting antenna and the receiving antenna are disposed at opposite ends of the transceiving chip (para 0028, 0029, 0033-0037)
Claim 18: Reider discloses a hole is formed in the substrate, and the transceiving chip is inserted into the hole (para 0028, 0029, 0033)
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 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.
Claim(s) 1 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Rieder (US 2022/0359328) in view of Nagaishi (US 2019/0310345).
Claim 1: Reider discloses A radar on-chip antenna apparatus, comprising: a transceiving chip disposed in a substrate to process a radar signal (para 0025); a transmitting antenna and a receiving antenna built into the transceiving chip and configured to transmit the radar signal and to receive the radar signal (para 0025), respectively; and a first lens disposed on a rear surface of the transceiving chip (para 0033-0037)
Reider does not specifically disclose a first lens and a second lens disposed on a rear surface of the transceiving chip.
In the same field of endeavor, Nagaishi discloses a radar on-chip apparatus (para 0003) comprising a transceiver chip (figures elements 510a, 510b, 520b, 520c, 600a) having transmitting and receiving antennas (figures elements 110a, 110b) and further comprising a first lens and a second lens disposed on a rear surface of the transceiving chip (fig 1 element 300a having two curved lenses with optical axes D1a and D1b)
Claim 2: Reider discloses the rear surface of the transceiving chip and the first lens and the second lens are attached to each other through direct contact (para 0033-0037)
Claim 3: Nagaishi discloses the first lens is disposed to be aligned with the transmitting antenna, and the second lens is disposed to be aligned with the receiving antenna (fig 1 element 300a having two curved lenses with optical axes D1a and D1b, fig 14, para 0086-0092)
Claim 4: Reider discloses the transmitting antenna and the receiving antenna are of a rear-radiating type (fig 1, para 0028, 0029)
Claim 5: Nagaishi discloses the transmitting antenna and the receiving antenna are disposed at a portion in the transceiving chip where interference therebetween is minimal (fig 1 element 300a having two curved lenses with optical axes D1a and D1b, fig 14, para 0086-0092)
Claim 6: Nagaishi discloses the transmitting antenna and the receiving antenna are disposed at opposite ends of the transceiving chip (fig 1 element 300a having two curved lenses with optical axes D1a and D1b, fig 14, para 0086-0092)
Claim 7: Reider discloses the first lens and the second lens are formed of silicon (para 0037)
Claim 8: Reider discloses the first lens and the second lens are attached to the rear surface of the transceiving chip using epoxy (para 0037, 0040)
Claim 9: Reider discloses a hole is formed in the substrate, and the transceiving chip is inserted into the hole (para 0028, 0029, 0033)
Claim 10: Reider discloses the first lens and the second lens are configured in a hemisphere form (para 0024)
Claim(s) 12, 13, 17, 19, 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Rieder (US 2022/0359328) as applied to claim 11 above and further in view of Nagaishi (US 2019/0310345).
Claim 12: Nagaishi discloses the lens portion includes a first lens and a second lens disposed apart from each other (fig 1 element 300a having two curved lenses with optical axes D1a and D1b, fig 14, para 0086-0092)
Claim 13: Nagaishi discloses the first lens is disposed to be aligned with the transmitting antenna, and the second lens is disposed to be aligned with the receiving antenna (fig 1 element 300a having two curved lenses with optical axes D1a and D1b, fig 14, para 0086-0092)
Claim 17: Reider discloses the first lens and the second lens are formed of silicon, and the first lens and the second lens are attached to the rear surface of the transceiving chip using epoxy (para 0037, 0040)
Claim 19: Reider in view of Nagaishi discloses a rear outer side of the transceiving chip and the first lens and the second lens are attached to each other through direct contact (Nagaishi fig 1 element 300a having two curved lenses with optical axes D1a and D1b, fig 14, para 0086-0092, Reider para 0033-0037)
Claim 20: Reider discloses the first lens and the second lens are configured in a hemisphere form (para 0024)
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. The additionally cited prior art comprises the state of the art for on-chip radar devices comprising dielectric lenses including several embodiments relevant to the present application.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to PETER M BYTHROW whose telephone number is (571)270-1468. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday-Friday 830am-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, Resha Desai can be reached at (571) 270-7792. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/PETER M BYTHROW/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3648
Prosecution Insights