DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application is being examined under the pre-AIA first to invent provisions.
Specification
The specification is objected to as failing to provide proper antecedent basis for the claimed subject matter. See 37 CFR 1.75(d)(1) and MPEP § 608.01(o). Correction of the following is required: “a conductive part” (claim 1), “antenna component” (claim 1+), “a first largest face of the dielectric slab” (claim 1), “a second largest face of the dielectric slab” (claim 20),
Drawings
The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. Therefore, the “dielectric slab supporting a conductive part, at least a portion of the conductive part lying on a first largest face of the dielectric slab” (claim 1), “a second conductive part lying on a second largest face of the dielectric slab, the first and second conductive parts being connected through first and second conductors respectively arranged substantially close to first and second edges of the dielectric slab” (claim 20) must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). No new matter should be entered.
The drawings are objected to as failing to comply with 37 CFR 1.84(p)(5) because they include the following reference character(s) not mentioned in the description: 210, 1408, 1410, 1708, 1709, 1710, 1711.
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
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.
Claim 1-20 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 recites the terms “antenna component” and “conductive part” which are not defined in the specification and cause confusion as to which parts of the antenna are being discussed relevant to the disclosed drawings and specification. For example, the specification utilizes the terms ‘antenna structure’, ‘antenna system’, and/or ‘radiating element’. A skilled artisan would not appropriately be able to identify which claim terms refer to which antenna portion or element. Accordingly the claim is rejected for being indefinite ‘in light of the specification’.
Claim 2-3 recites “the antenna system” which lacks antecedent basis in the claim, and further which is indefinite because it is unclear what/how the antenna system corresponds to the antenna component, especially in light of the specification and the claim 1 rejection above. For example, it is unclear how the lowers intrinsic frequency of an antenna system corresponds with the first and second frequency regions of the antenna component recited in claim 1 and whether they are similar frequency or different frequency regions and causing further indefiniteness issues.
Claim 7 recites “all the frequencies ranges for CDMA, GSM850, and GSM900, and the second frequency region including at least all the frequencies ranges for GSM1800, GSM1900, and UMTS”. However this limitation is indefinite because the frequencies of operation are not listed and a skilled artisan would recognize, for example that CDMA and UMTS have different frequency ranges based on different regions of operation including different counties.
Claim 17-19 recites the limitation "conductive element". There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. It is further indefinite what “the conductive element” refers to because it has not been related to any parts of the claimed invention.
Claim 20 recites “a second conductive part lying on a second largest face of the dielectric slab, the first and second conductive parts being connected through first and second conductors respectively arranged substantially close to first and second edges of the dielectric slab.” First, there is insufficient antecedent basis for “first and second conductors” in the claim. Further, there is no explanation of any dielectric slab and how they would interact with conductive parts in the specification or drawings nor how conductors may be arranged close to first and second edges of the dielectric slab. For example, it is indefinite how if there is one dielectric slab and conductive parts on the slab, there could be multiple ‘first and second largest faces of the slab’ on which conductive parts are disposed, much less first and second conductors. Accordingly the limitation in its entirety is indefinite ‘in light of the specification’ since a skilled artisan would not know how to evaluate the limitation.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(a) which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
(a) A patent may not be obtained though the invention is not identically disclosed or described as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the subject matter sought to be patented and the prior art are such that the subject matter as a whole would have been obvious at the time the invention was made to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which said subject matter pertains. Patentability shall not be negatived by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claim(s) 1-20 is/are rejected under pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(a) as obvious over USPN 6795027 B2 (Boyle) in view of US 6970135 B2 (Sato).
Claim 1: Boyle teaches an antenna component (e.g., see 100, 200, 300, 400, 500 in FIGS. 1-11) for a wireless communication device comprising: a conductive part (e.g., see 104, 204, 304, 404, 504) defining a conductive contour that includes no more than 25 connected segments (e.g., as shown), each pair of connected segments defining a corner (e.g., whereas said segments are defined by corner regions) wherein the antenna component fits completely in a radiator box defining a radiator rectangle having an area smaller than 0.3% of the square of the wavelength corresponding to a lowest operating frequency of the antenna component (e.g., see FIGS. 6 and 8; see reduction of antenna of Fig. 1 down to L = 11mm as shown in Fig. 2; see Col. 3, Lns. 50-63 which teaches reduction/adjustment of the dimensions of antennas of Figs. 3 and 10 further such that the longest side is no longer than approx. 15mm on each side; also see antenna of Fig. 11, Col. 4, Lns. 63-68, which has a width of approximately 14mm and length 9mm), the antenna component being operable in but not resonant in first and second frequency regions that are separated by a gap (e.g., see FIGS. 2 and 4 showing an approximate 1.2 GHz resonant frequency of the antenna component), the first frequency region being lower than the second frequency region (e.g., 900 MHz region being lower than 1800 MHz region), and wherein the antenna component is configured to be connected to a matching system (e.g., see FIG. 5) and mounted onto a plane including or parallel to a ground plane layer (e.g., see 102, 502), wherein at least a portion of an orthogonal projection of the conductive contour does not overlap the ground plane layer (e.g., as shown in Figures).
Boyle does not explicitly teach a dielectric slab supporting a conductive part, at least a portion of the conductive part lying on a first largest face of the dielectric slab.
However Sato teaches an antenna component comprising a conductive part (e.g., see 1 in FIG. 7); a dielectric slab (e.g., see 7) supporting a conductive part, at least a portion of the conductive part lying on a first largest face of the dielectric slab.
Before the effective filing date of the invention, it would have been obvious to a skilled artisan to implement a dielectric slab in Boyle for supporting the conductive part, at least a portion of the conductive part lying on a first largest face of the dielectric slab as taught by Sato in order to provide support to the antenna, load the antenna with a dielectric substrate to alter the frequency of operation, and/or make the conductive part selectable and readily replaceable according to the desired frequency as taught by Sato (e.g., see Col 8, Lns. 8-16).
Claim 2: Boyle teaches an antenna system comprising: the antenna component of claim 1, wherein the antenna system has a lowest intrinsic frequency outside the first frequency region (e.g., wherein the lowest frequency 900 MHz is made to be outside the first frequency region).
Claim 3: Boyle teaches the antenna system of claim 2, wherein the antenna system has a lowest intrinsic frequency outside the second frequency region (wherein the 900 MHz frequency is outside the second 1800 MHz frequency region).
Claim 4: Boyle teaches the antenna component of claim 1, wherein the radiator rectangle has an area smaller than 0.25% of the square of the wavelength corresponding to the lowest operating frequency of the antenna component (e.g., see FIGS. 6 and 8; see reduction of antenna of Fig. 1 down to L = 11mm as shown in Fig. 2; see Col. 3, Lns. 50-63 which teaches reduction/adjustment of the dimensions of antennas of Figs. 3 and 10 further such that the longest side is no longer than approx. 15mm on each side; also see antenna of Fig. 11, Col. 4, Lns. 63-68, which has a width of approximately 14mm and length 9mm).
Claim 5: Boyle teaches the antenna component of claim 1, wherein the conductive contour includes no more than 5 connected segments (e.g., as shown in Figures).
Claim 6: Boyle teaches the antenna component of claim 1, wherein a longest side of the radiator rectangle is shorter than 5% of a longest operating wavelength of the antenna component (e.g., see FIGS. 6 and 8; see reduction of antenna of Fig. 1 down to L = 11mm as shown in Fig. 2; see Col. 3, Lns. 50-63 which teaches reduction/adjustment of the dimensions of antennas of Figs. 3 and 10 further such that the longest side is no longer than approx. 15mm on each side which is less than 5% of the longest wavelength; also see antenna of Fig. 11, Col. 4, Lns. 63-68, which has a width of approximately 14mm and length 9mm).
Claim 7: Boyle teaches the antenna component of claim 1, wherein the antenna component is configured to transmit and receive mobile communication signals in the first and second frequency regions, the first frequency region including at least all the frequencies ranges for CDMA, GSM850, and GSM900 (e.g., see FIG. 8 wherein the frequency region in FIG. 6 clearly includes an operable range of 50Mhz +/- around 900Mhz), and the second frequency region including at least all the frequencies ranges for GSM1800, GSM1900, and UMTS (e.g., e.g., wherein the frequency region in FIG. 6 clearly includes an operable range of 100Mhz +/- around 1800 MHz).
Claim 8: Boyle does not explicitly teach the antenna component of claim 1, wherein the antenna component is configured to transmit and receive WIFI communication signals in the first and second frequency regions, the first frequency region including at least all the frequencies ranges for WIFI 802.11b/g, and the second frequency region including at least all the frequencies ranges for WIFI 802.11a.
However Boyle teaches resonance of the antenna component in a WIFI 2.4 GHz range (e.g., see FIG. 4). Furthermore, antenna scaling where the antenna dimensions are dependent upon the antenna frequency and manipulation of the concept for a desired frequency range is ‘old and well-known’ in the art. Before the effective filing date of the invention, it would have been obvious to a skilled artisan to scale the antenna of Boyle to achieve the second frequency region including 802.11b/g and 802.11a ranges for operation of the WIFI protocol at any of these regions and frequencies and further obvious to a skilled artisan to satisfy the requirements of the IEEE Standards 802.11 with the device of Boyle since satisfying the operational and/or regulatory requirements of a particular application would have flown naturally to one of ordinary skill in the art.
Claim 9-10: Boyle teaches the antenna component of claim 1, wherein the radiator rectangle has an area smaller than 0.1% or 0.05% of the square of the wavelength corresponding to the lowest operating frequency of the antenna component (e.g., see FIGS. 6 and 8; see reduction of antenna of Fig. 1 down to L = 11mm as shown in Fig. 2; see Col. 3, Lns. 50-63 which teaches reduction/adjustment of the dimensions of antennas of Figs. 3 and 10 further such that the longest side is no longer than approx. 15mm on each side; also see antenna of Fig. 11, Col. 4, Lns. 63-68, which has a width of approximately 14mm and length 9mm).
Claims 11-15: Boyle teaches the antenna component of claim 1, wherein an entire contour of the conductive part is characterized by a complexity factor F21 less than 1.1 and substantially close to 1 (e.g., at least see the simple near rectangular radiating elements of the Figures, especially Figs. 1 and 11, where when using the methodology as taught in the Applicant’s specification for obtaining F21, see at least Paras. 94-135, yields a F21 factor less than 1.1 and close to 1, also see MPEP §§ 2114 and 2112.01(I)).
Claim 16: Boyle teaches the antenna component of claim 1, wherein a longest side of the radiator rectangle is longer than 3.5% of a longest operating wavelength of the antenna component (e.g., see FIGS. 6 and 8; see reduction of antenna of Fig. 1 down to L = 11mm as shown in Fig. 2; see Col. 3, Lns. 50-63 which teaches reduction/adjustment of the dimensions of antennas of Figs. 3 and 10 further such that the longest side is no longer than approx. 15mm on each side which is less than 3.5% of the longest wavelength; also see antenna of Fig. 11, Col. 4, Lns. 63-68, which has a width of approximately 14mm and length 9mm).
Claim 17: Boyle teaches the antenna component of claim 1, wherein the conductive element defines a single current path for both the first and second frequency regions (e.g., wherein the antenna of Boyle is continuous and provides one current path through the feed).
Claim 18: Boyle teaches an antenna system comprising: the antenna component of claim 1, wherein the antenna component is mounted onto a plane including or parallel to a ground plane layer (e.g., as shown), wherein at least a portion of an orthogonal projection of a conductive contour fully enclosing the conductive element does not overlap the ground plane layer for at least 50% of the surface of the conductive contour (e.g., wherein the antenna component and its contour in FIGS. 1-11 does not overlap with the ground plane layer).
Claim 19: Boyle teaches the antenna system of claim 18, wherein at least a portion of the orthogonal projection of the conductive contour fully enclosing the conductive element does not overlap the ground plane layer for 100% of the surface of the conductive contour (e.g., wherein the antenna component and its contour in FIGS. 1-11 does not overlap with the ground plane layer).
Claim 20: the modified invention of Boyle as modified in the claim 1 rejection (and as best understood), teaches the antenna component of claim 1, further comprising: a second conductive part lying on a second largest face of the dielectric slab, the first and second conductive parts being connected through first and second conductors respectively arranged substantially close to first and second edges of the dielectric slab (e.g., wherein additional segments and/or parts of the antenna component of Boyle are second conductive parts and additional portions of the dielectric slab are second largest faces and the conductors in FIG. 7 of Sato are close to the edges of the dielectric slab 7).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to AMAL PATEL whose telephone number is (571)270-7443. 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, Dimary Lopez can be reached on (571) 270-7893. 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.
/AMAL PATEL/Examiner, Art Unit 2845
Prosecution Insights