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 .
Double Patenting
The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory double patenting rejection is appropriate where the conflicting claims are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969).
A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on nonstatutory double patenting provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with the examined application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. See MPEP § 717.02 for applications subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA as explained in MPEP § 2159. See MPEP § 2146 et seq. for applications not subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b).
The filing of a terminal disclaimer by itself is not a complete reply to a nonstatutory double patenting (NSDP) rejection. A complete reply requires that the terminal disclaimer be accompanied by a reply requesting reconsideration of the prior Office action. Even where the NSDP rejection is provisional the reply must be complete. See MPEP § 804, subsection I.B.1. For a reply to a non-final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.111(a). For a reply to final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.113(c). A request for reconsideration while not provided for in 37 CFR 1.113(c) may be filed after final for consideration. See MPEP §§ 706.07(e) and 714.13.
The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The actual filing date of the application in which the form is filed determines what form (e.g., PTO/SB/25, PTO/SB/26, PTO/AIA /25, or PTO/AIA /26) should be used. A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/applying-online/eterminal-disclaimer.
Claims 1-20 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-20 of U.S. Patent No. 12,244,077. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because they contain substantially similar subject matter (see chart below).
Claims 2-13 and 15-19 are also rejected as being dependent on claims 1 and 14, and may also correspond to claims 2-12 and 14-19 of the ‘077 patent.
Instant Application
US Patent No. 12,244,077
1. A system comprising: a frame; a printed circuit board (PCB) mounted to the frame; at least one antenna electrically connected to the PCB via an antenna feed, wherein the antenna is to operate within a specified frequency range; and a dual parasitic arm in which electrical current is routed to at least two different portions of the frame, creating at least two different resonances in the dual parasitic arm, wherein the at least two different resonances in the dual parasitic arm radiate in conjunction with the antenna, providing constructive interference in the specified frequency range.
1. A system comprising: a frame; a printed circuit board (PCB) mounted to the frame; and at least one antenna electrically connected to the PCB via an antenna feed, wherein the antenna is to operate within a specified frequency range, wherein the frame includes a plurality of separate, electrically isolated locations to which electrical current is routable, each of the locations radiating at different frequencies, wherein a specified location of the frame is selected from the plurality of separate, electrically isolated locations on the frame, such that electrical current is routed to the selected specified location on the frame, the specified location being selected on the frame to act as a parasitic arm that provides constructive interference within the specified frequency range, and wherein electrical current flowing to the antenna is routed to the selected location on the frame to create the parasitic arm, such that the parasitic arm radiates in conjunction with the antenna, providing constructive interference in the specified frequency range.
11. The system of claim 1, wherein the electrical current flowing to the antenna is routed to at least two different portions of the frame to create a dual parasitic arm having multiple resonances.
14. A mobile electronic device comprising: a frame; a printed circuit board (PCB) mounted to the frame; at least one antenna electrically connected to the PCB via an antenna feed, wherein the antenna is to operate within a specified frequency range; and a dual parasitic arm in which electrical current is routed to at least two different portions of the frame, creating at least two different resonances in the dual parasitic arm, wherein the at least two different resonances in the dual parasitic arm radiate in conjunction with the antenna, providing constructive interference in the specified frequency range.
13. A mobile electronic device comprising: a frame; a printed circuit board (PCB) mounted to the frame; and at least one antenna electrically connected to the PCB via an antenna feed, wherein the antenna is to operate within a specified frequency range, wherein the frame includes a plurality of separate, electrically isolated locations to which electrical current is routable, each of the locations radiating at different frequencies, wherein a specified location of the frame is selected from the plurality of separate, electrically isolated locations on the frame, such that electrical current is routed to the selected specified location on the frame, the specified location being selected on the frame to act as a parasitic arm that provides constructive interference within the specified frequency range, and wherein electrical current flowing to the antenna is routed to the selected location on the frame to create the parasitic arm, such that the parasitic arm radiates in conjunction with the antenna, providing constructive interference in the specified frequency range.
11. The system of claim 1, wherein the electrical current flowing to the antenna is routed to at least two different portions of the frame to create a dual parasitic arm having multiple resonances.
20. A method of manufacturing comprising: providing a frame; mounting a printed circuit board (PCB) to the frame; electrically connecting at least one antenna to the PCB via an antenna feed, wherein the antenna is to operate within a specified frequency range; and providing a dual parasitic arm in which electrical current is routed to at least two different portions of the frame, creating at least two different resonances in the dual parasitic arm, wherein the at least two different resonances in the dual parasitic arm radiate in conjunction with the antenna, providing constructive interference in the specified frequency range.
20. A method of manufacturing comprising: providing a frame; mounting a printed circuit board (PCB) to the frame; and electrically connecting at least one antenna to the PCB via an antenna feed, wherein the antenna is to operate within a specified frequency range, wherein the frame includes a plurality of separate, electrically isolated locations to which electrical current is routable, each of the locations radiating at different frequencies, wherein a specified location of the frame is selected from the plurality of separate, electrically isolated locations on the frame, such that electrical current is routed to the selected specified location on the frame, the specified location being selected on the frame to act as a parasitic arm that provides constructive interference within the specified frequency range, and wherein electrical current flowing to the antenna is routed to the selected location on the frame to create the parasitic arm, such that the parasitic arm radiates in conjunction with the antenna, providing constructive interference in the specified frequency range.
11. The system of claim 1, wherein the electrical current flowing to the antenna is routed to at least two different portions of the frame to create a dual parasitic arm having multiple resonances.
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 19 is 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.
The term “insufficiently long” in claim 19 is a relative term which renders the claim indefinite. The term “insufficiently long” is not defined by the claim, the specification does not provide a standard for ascertaining the requisite degree, and one of ordinary skill in the art would not be reasonably apprised of the scope of the invention. Although the specified length and/or specified frequency range are given some definition and boundaries within the specification, the “insufficient” length of the antenna to operate within the specified frequency range is not defined such that one can reasonably interpret that limitation since evidence as to even what a “sufficient” length may be considered since a shorter (or insufficient) length antenna would still function. For examination purposes, the Examiner will interpret the length of the antenna within the prior art below as being “insufficiently long” in comparison to a much larger antenna that is larger than the entire device and such that it operates and may be considered to overachieve in its radiation performance.
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 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.
Claims 1, 6-7, 10-17 and 19-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Yamagajo et al. (US 2019/0341675).
In regards to claim 1, Yamagajo discloses of a system comprising: a frame (for example 55); a printed circuit board (PCB, for example 505, see Paragraphs 0049-0053) mounted to the frame (55); at least one antenna (for example see 110) electrically connected to the PCB (505) via an antenna feed (for example 111), wherein the antenna (110) is to operate within a specified frequency range (the antenna may operate in a specified range such as the examples given in Paragraphs 0058-00590, 0079, 0087-0094); and a dual parasitic arm in which electrical current is routed to at least two different portions of the frame (55), creating at least two different resonances in the dual parasitic arm (for example see Figs 11-13, different portions of the frame 55 create the dual parasitic arm, and Paragraphs 0067-0068, 0079, 0091-0094, 0099-0100), wherein the at least two different resonances in the dual parasitic arm radiate in conjunction with the antenna, providing constructive interference in the specified frequency range (for example see Paragraphs 0079, 0091-0094).
In regards to claim 6, Yamagajo discloses of the system of claim 1, wherein the specified frequency range in which the antenna is to operate is lower than a maximum frequency that is providable by the antenna (see range examples given in Paragraphs 0058-00590, 0079, 0087-0094).
In regards to claim 7, Yamagajo discloses of the system of claim 6, wherein the antenna (110) is shorter than a maximum specified length (110 is shorter than the entire length of the device which may be considered the specified length).
In regards to claim 10, Yamagajo discloses of the system of claim 1, wherein the dual parasitic arm of the antenna is configured to create the at least two different resonances within an ultrahigh frequency band (see examples in Paragraphs 0067-0068, 0079, 0091-0094, 0099-0100, ranges may be considered ultrahigh in light of Applicant’s specification).
In regards to claim 11, Yamagajo discloses of the system of claim 1, wherein the antenna (110)) is configured to operate in a plurality of frequency bands (see examples in Figs 3-7, 11-13, 15-18 and Paragraphs 0067-0068, 0079, 0091-0094, 0099-0100).
In regards to claim 12, Yamagajo discloses of the system of claim 11, wherein the antenna is configured to operate within the plurality of frequency bands and within an ultrahigh frequency band (see examples in Paragraphs 0067-0068, 0079, 0091-0094, 0099-0100, ranges may be considered ultrahigh in light of Applicant’s specification).
In regards to claim 13, Yamagajo discloses of the system of claim 1, wherein the electrical current flowing to the antenna (see 210) is routed to at least three different portions of the frame (55) to create a triple parasitic arm having a plurality of resonances (for example see Figs 15-18).
In regards to claim 14, Yamagajo discloses of a mobile electronic device comprising: a frame (for example 55); a printed circuit board (PCB, for example 505, see Paragraphs 0049-0053) mounted to the frame (55); at least one antenna (for example 110) electrically connected to the PCB (505) via an antenna feed (for example 111), wherein the antenna (110) is to operate within a specified frequency range (the antenna may operate in a specified range such as the examples given in Paragraphs 0058-00590, 0079, 0087-0094); and a dual parasitic arm in which electrical current is routed to at least two different portions of the frame (55), creating at least two different resonances in the dual parasitic arm (for example see Figs 11-13, different portions of the frame 55 create the dual parasitic arm, and Paragraphs 0067-0068, 0079, 0091-0094, 0099-0100), wherein the at least two different resonances in the dual parasitic arm radiate in conjunction with the antenna, providing constructive interference in the specified frequency range (for example see Paragraphs 0079, 0091-0094).
In regards to claim 15, Yamagajo discloses of the mobile electronic device of claim 14, wherein the at least two different portions of the frame (55) to which electrical current is routed are selected to ensure that the dual parasitic arm provides constructive interference within the specified frequency range (for example see Paragraphs 0067-0068, 0079, 0091-0094, 0099-0100).
In regards to claim 16, Yamagajo discloses of the mobile electronic device of claim 14, further comprising a chassis (for example housing 500A) that is electrically connected to the frame (55, see Fig 1 and Paragraphs 0047, 0050).
In regards to claim 17, Yamagajo discloses of the mobile electronic device of claim 16, wherein the electrical current flowing to the antenna is routed to both the chassis (505) and the frame (55) to create the dual parasitic arm, such that the chassis and the frame comprise the dual parasitic arm (see Figs 1, 3-7, 11-13, 15-18 and Paragraphs 0067-0068, 0079, 0091-0094, 0099-0100).
In regards to claim 19, Yamagajo discloses of the mobile electronic device of claim 14, wherein the antenna (110) operates within the specified frequency range for which the antenna's length is insufficiently long without implementing frequency tuners (the antenna may operate in a specified range such as the examples given in Paragraphs 0058-00590, 0079, 0087-0094 with no included tuners).
In regards to claim 20, Yamagajo discloses of a method of manufacturing comprising: providing a frame (for example 55); mounting a printed circuit board (PCB, for example 505, see Paragraphs 0049-0053) to the frame (55); electrically connecting at least one antenna (for example 110) to the PCB (505) via an antenna feed (for example 111), wherein the antenna (110) is to operate within a specified frequency range (the antenna may operate in a specified range such as the examples given in Paragraphs 0058-00590, 0079, 0087-0094); and providing a dual parasitic arm in which electrical current is routed to at least two different portions of the frame (55), creating at least two different resonances in the dual parasitic arm (for example see Figs 11-13, different portions of the frame 55 create the dual parasitic arm, and Paragraphs 0067-0068, 0079, 0091-0094, 0099-0100), wherein the at least two different resonances in the dual parasitic arm radiate in conjunction with the antenna, providing constructive interference in the specified frequency range (for example see Paragraphs 0079, 0091-0094).
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 9 and 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yamagajo et al. (US 2019/0341675) in view of Chen et al. (US 2019/0198975).
In regards to claim 9, Yamagajo discloses of the system of claim 1 as found within the explanation above.
However, Yamagajo does not explicitly disclose of wherein the antenna is printed on a dielectric material and is positioned on a periphery portion of the frame.
Chen discloses of a system comprising a frame (for example 120); a printed circuit board (PCB) mounted to the frame (120, see Paragraph 0026); at least one antenna (for example 140) electrically connected to the PCB via an antenna feed (for example 130); wherein the antenna (140) operates within a specified frequency range for which the antenna’s length is insufficiently long (for example see Paragraphs 0037-0038); wherein electrical current flowing to the antenna (130) is routed to a least a portion of the frame (120) to create a parasitic arm (including 190, see Paragraph 0035); wherein a dielectric material is positioned on a periphery portion of the frame (120, see Paragraphs 0026, 0033).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to have a dielectric material on a periphery portion of the frame as taught by Chen for providing a portion of the frame that is insulated and non-conductive to the current.
In regards to claim 18, Yamagajo discloses of the mobile electronic device of claim 14 as found within the explanation above.
However, Yamagajo does not explicitly disclose of wherein the parasitic arm in the frame is L-shaped or S-shaped.
Chen discloses of a system comprising a frame (for example 120); a printed circuit board (PCB) mounted to the frame (120, see Paragraph 0026); at least one antenna (for example 140) electrically connected to the PCB via an antenna feed (for example 130); wherein the antenna (140) operates within a specified frequency range for which the antenna’s length is insufficiently long (for example see Paragraphs 0037-0038); wherein electrical current flowing to the antenna (130) is routed to a least a portion of the frame (120) to create a parasitic arm (including 190, see Paragraph 0035); wherein the parasitic arm in the frame is L-shaped (for example see 190 in Figs 1-2, 4A-4C) or S-shaped (see Paragraph 0045, the shapes are not limited to the examples illustrated, therefore, S-shaped is a possible configuration).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to have the parasitic arm in an L-shape or S-shape as taught by Chen for providing improving and increasing the frequency resonant paths of the antenna device to achieve a more desired radiation operation of the antenna device.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Jason M Crawford whose telephone number is (571)272-6004. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri 6:00am-3:00pm.
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, Alexander Taningco can be reached at 571-272-8048. 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.
/JASON M CRAWFORD/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2844
Prosecution Insights