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 7/11/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant argues that Takahashi does not disclose that the patch antenna 510 corresponds to the feeding portion 210. He alleges that all the patch antenna units correspond to a same feeding portion 400.
Examiner respectfully disagrees.
According to paragraph [0032], the antenna 500 is provided on the surface of the layer L1. The signal line 220 of the power supply line 200 is disposed on the lower front surface (back surface) of the layer L7.
According to paragraph [0051], the power supply line is disposed on the back surface of the substrate and power is fed from the power supply line to the antenna on the front side via a waveguide.
Thus, even though Figure 1 of Takahashi illustrates the power supply as feeding portion is at the bottom (back surface), the power is still fed from the power line to the antenna on the top (the front side) via waveguide.
Applicant argues that the patch antenna is not partially overlapping with the feeding portion in a vertical projection direction.
Examiner respectfully disagrees.
Annotated figure 1 below clearly shows that the patch antenna is partially overlapping with the feeding portion in a vertical projection direction.
PNG
media_image1.png
536
689
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Applicant argues that Miraftab fails to disclose any of the features of "the patch antenna corresponds to the feeding portion", "a slot antenna layer comprising a slot corresponding to the patch antenna", "one of the patch antenna units partially overlapping with the feeding portion in a vertical projection direction", "a plurality of first via structures connected to the slot antenna layer and the patch antenna layer" and "a plurality of second via structures connected to the slot antenna layer and the feeding layer".
However, these features are taught in Takashi except a plurality of first and second vias. Takahashi teaches a first via (via 320A) and a second via (320B) but does not limit to single via.
On the other hand, Miraftab teaches plurality of vias to cure the deficiency of plurality of vias in Takashi.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to have provided a plurality of vias in Takashi in order to connect with the certain desired number of patch antennas as taught by Miraftab.
Applicant alleges that neither Takahashi nor Miraftab discloses a slot antenna layer comprising a slot corresponding to the patch antenna.
However, applicant does not provide any rationale to support his statements. Takahashi clearly teaches a slot antenna layer (comprised of L3, 340) comprising a slot (opening 340) corresponding to the patch antenna (510, 520) (Fig. 1, paragraphs [0036], [0041], [0042], [0057]).
Applicant alleges that Takahashi and Miraftab fail to disclose: (i) the stack sequence of the feeding layers, the patch antenna layers, the slot antenna layers and the serial patch antenna layer; (ii) the disposing position of the feeding portion and the disposing position of the patch antenna and the disposing position of the slot are corresponding to each other; (iii) the first via structures and the second via structures are connected to different layers.
However, applicant fail to provide sufficient rationale to support his allegations. Further, these limitations are not exactly recited in any claims.
Claim Rejections – 35 U.S.C. 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.
Claim(s) 1-10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Takahashi et al. (2024/0235034) in view of Miraftab et al. (2016/0204514).
Regarding Claim 1, Takahashi et al. (2024/0235034) discloses an antenna structure comprising:
a feeding layer (comprised of power line 200, L6, L7) comprising a feeding portion (220, 210) configured to feed a signal (fig. 1);
a patch antenna layer (comprised of 500, 510, 520, L1, L2, 110C) comprising a grounding layer (110C) and a patch antenna (510, 520), wherein a spacing (space for having 400) is between the grounding layer (110C) and the patch antenna (510, 520), and the patch antenna corresponds to the feeding portion (220, 210) (paragraphs [0032], [0036], [0041], [0042], [0051]);
a slot antenna layer (comprised of L3, 340) comprising a slot (opening 340) corresponding to the patch antenna (510, 520) (Fig. 1, paragraphs [0036], [0041], [0042], [0057]);
a serial patch antenna layer (600) comprising a serial patch antenna group (each row, 610, 710, 810, etc) (Figs. 12, 13), the serial patch antenna group comprising a plurality of patch antenna units (P, or each rectangular unit) (fig. 5), one of the patch antenna units (P, figs. 10, 11) partially overlapping with the feeding portion (220, 210) in a vertical projection direction (figs. 10, 11);
PNG
media_image1.png
536
689
media_image1.png
Greyscale
first via structure (via 320A) connected to the slot antenna layer and the patch antenna layer (paragraphs [0030], [0033]; “the fed signal is transmitted to the power feeding unit via the waveguide and power is fed from the power feeding unit to the antenna 500 by proximity coupling”, paragraph [0064]) (See annotated Fig. 6 below); and
second via structure (via 320B) connected to the slot antenna layer (340) and the feeding layer (200) (See annotated Fig. 6 below);
PNG
media_image2.png
495
973
media_image2.png
Greyscale
wherein the signal is from the feeding layer (200) through the patch antenna layer (510, 520), the slot antenna layer (340), and couples and resonates with the serial patch antenna layer (P) (“reflection from the antenna in within an allowable range 1GHz..”, paragraphs [0046], [0003]; “a power supply line (supply line) 200, a waveguide 300 which transmits a signal fed from the power supply line 200 from a back surface side to a front surface side of the dielectric substrate 100, a power feeding unit 400 which feeds power to the antenna by proximity coupling on the basis of the signal transmitted by the waveguide 300, and an antenna 500 which radiates a radio wave on the basis of the signal fed from the power feeding unit 400”, paragraph [0024], fig. 1).
As discussed above, Takahashi essentially discloses the claimed invention but does not explicitly disclose plurality of via structures.
However, Miraftab et al. (2016/0204514) discloses a grid array of vias (566) to connect the grid array of patch antennas (fig. 5, paragraph [0066]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to have provided a plurality of vias in Takahashi in order to connect with the certain desired number of patch antennas as taught by Miraftab.
Further, it has been held that adding duplicate parts without providing improvement and novelty merely involves routine skill in the art.
In re Harza, 274 F.2d 669, 124 USPQ 378 (CCPA 1960) (Claims at issue were directed to a water-tight masonry structure wherein a water seal of flexible material fills the joints which form between adjacent pours of concrete. The claimed water seal has a “web” which lies in the joint, and a plurality of “ribs” projecting outwardly from each side of the web into one of the adjacent concrete slabs. The prior art disclosed a flexible water stop for preventing passage of water between masses of concrete in the shape of a plus sign (+). Although the reference did not disclose a plurality of ribs, the court held that mere duplication of parts has no patentable significance unless a new and unexpected result is produced.).
Regarding Claim 2, Takahashi et al. discloses the antenna structure according to claim 1, wherein a setting position of the feeding portion corresponds to a middle position of the serial patch antenna layer (610, 710, 810) (annotated Figs. 10 and 13 below).
PNG
media_image3.png
330
537
media_image3.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image4.png
321
751
media_image4.png
Greyscale
Regarding Claim 3, Takahashi et al. discloses the claimed invention but does not explicitly disclose the antenna structure according to claim 1, wherein a number of the patch antenna units is an odd number, when the number of the patch antenna units is N, a setting position of the feeding portion corresponds to (N+1)/2 of the patch antenna units.
However, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to have a predetermined or desired number of patch antenna unit for a feeding portion Takahashi in order to generate a desired radiation.
Regarding Claim 4, Takahashi discloses the antenna structure according to claim 1, wherein when the patch antenna layer (comprised of 500, 510, 520, L1, L2, 110C) and the slot antenna layer (comprised of L3, 340) are observed along the vertical projection direction, the first via structures and the second via structures surround the spacing (space for having 400) and the patch antenna (510, 520) (Figs. 10, 11).
Regarding Claim 5, Takahashi discloses the antenna structure according to claim 4, wherein at least a part of the first via structures and the second via structures are arranged at equal intervals (space between 320A, 320B).
Regarding Claim 6, Takahashi discloses the antenna structure according to claim 5, wherein the feeding portion is a microstrip antenna (200 is a microstrip line. It is part of the antenna device), and a setting position of the first via structures corresponds to the microstrip antenna.
Regarding Claim 7, Takahashi discloses the antenna structure according to claim 1, wherein the antenna structure has a resonance frequency between 76 GHz and 81 GHz (paragraph [0003]).
Regarding Claim 8, Takahashi discloses an antenna structure comprising:
a feeding layer (comprised of power line 200, L6, L7) comprising a plurality of feeding portions (220, 210) respectively configured to feed a plurality of signals;
a patch antenna layer (comprised of 500, 510, 520, L1, L2, 110C) comprising a grounding layer (110C) comprising a grounding layer (110C) and a plurality of patch antennas (510, 520), wherein a spacing (space for having 400) is between the grounding layer (110C) and each of the patch antennas, and the patch antennas (510, 520) respectively correspond to the feeding portions (220, 210) (paragraphs [0036], [0041], [0042]);
a slot antenna layer (comprised of L3, 340) comprising a plurality of slots (opening 340) respectively corresponding to the patch antennas (510, 520) (Fig. 1, paragraphs [0036], [0041], [0042]);
a serial patch antenna layer (600) comprising a plurality of serial patch antenna groups (each row, 610, 710, 810, etc) (Figs. 12, 13), each of the serial patch antenna groups comprising a plurality of patch antenna units (P or each rectangular unit) (fig. 5), and one of the patch antenna units (P, figs. 10, 11)of each of the serial patch antenna groups partially overlapping with the feeding portions (220, 210) in a vertical projection direction (figs. 10, 11);
first via structure (320A) connected to the slot antenna layer and the patch antenna layer (paragraphs [0030], [0033]; “the fed signal is transmitted to the power feeding unit via the waveguide and power is fed from the power feeding unit to the antenna 500 by proximity coupling”, paragraph [0064]) (See annotated Fig. 6 below); and
second via structure (320B) connected to the slot antenna layer (340) and the feeding layer (200) (See annotated Fig. 6 below);
PNG
media_image5.png
494
973
media_image5.png
Greyscale
wherein the signals are from the feeding layer through the patch antenna layer (510, 520), the slot antenna layer (340), and couple and resonate with the serial patch antenna layer (P) (“reflection from the antenna in within an allowable range 1GHz..”, paragraphs [0046], [0003]; “a power supply line (supply line) 200, a waveguide 300 which transmits a signal fed from the power supply line 200 from a back surface side to a front surface side of the dielectric substrate 100, a power feeding unit 400 which feeds power to the antenna by proximity coupling on the basis of the signal transmitted by the waveguide 300, and an antenna 500 which radiates a radio wave on the basis of the signal fed from the power feeding unit 400”, paragraph [0024], fig. 1).
As discussed above, Takahashi essentially discloses the claimed invention but does not explicitly disclose plurality of via structures.
However, Miraftab et al. (2016/0204514) discloses a grid array of vias (566) to connect the grid array of patch antennas (fig. 5, paragraph [0066]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to have provided a plurality of vias in Takahashi in order to connect with the certain number of patch antennas as taught by Miraftab.
As discussed above, Takahashi essentially discloses the claimed invention but does not explicitly disclose a plurality of feed portions.
However, Miraftab et al. (2016/0204514) discloses plurality of feed points or ports to feed signals to antenna elements (paragraph [0088]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to have provided plurality of feed portions in Takahashi in order to feed signals to certain number of antenna elements as taught by Miraftab.
Further, it has been held that adding duplicate parts merely involves routine skill in the art.
In re Harza, 274 F.2d 669, 124 USPQ 378 (CCPA 1960) (Claims at issue were directed to a water-tight masonry structure wherein a water seal of flexible material fills the joints which form between adjacent pours of concrete. The claimed water seal has a “web” which lies in the joint, and a plurality of “ribs” projecting outwardly from each side of the web into one of the adjacent concrete slabs. The prior art disclosed a flexible water stop for preventing passage of water between masses of concrete in the shape of a plus sign (+). Although the reference did not disclose a plurality of ribs, the court held that mere duplication of parts has no patentable significance unless a new and unexpected result is produced.).
Regarding Claim 9, Takahashi discloses the antenna structure according to claim 8, wherein a setting position of each of the feeding portions corresponds to a middle position of the serial patch antenna layer, and the antenna structure has a resonance frequency between 76 GHz and 81 GHz. (paragraph [0003]).
Regarding Claim 10, Takahashi discloses the antenna structure according to claim 8, wherein when the patch antenna layer (comprised of 500, 510, 520, L1, L2, 110C) and the slot antenna layer (comprised of L3, 340) are observed along the vertical projection direction, the first via structure (320A) and the second via structure (320B) surround the patch antennas (510, 520) (Figs. 10, 11).
at least a part of the first via structures and the second via structures are arranged at equal intervals (space between 320A, 320B).
each of the feeding portions is a microstrip antenna (200 is a microstrip line. It is part of the antenna device), and a setting position of each of the first via structure (320A) corresponds to the microstrip antenna.
PNG
media_image4.png
321
751
media_image4.png
Greyscale
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.
Correspondence
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Examiner Wilson Lee whose telephone number is (571) 272-1824. Proposed amendment and interview agenda can be submitted to Examiner’s direct fax at (571) 273-1824.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, examiner’s supervisor, Alexander Taningco can be reached at (571) 272-8048. Papers related to the application may be submitted by facsimile transmission. Any transmission not to be considered an official response must be clearly marked "DRAFT". The official fax number is (571) 273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Center. Status information for published applications may be obtained from Patent Center. For more information about the Patent Center, see https://patentcenter.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Patent Center, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free).
/WILSON LEE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2845
Prosecution Insights