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 .
Specification
The disclosure is objected to because of the following informalities:
In multiple instances, the term “radiation pattern” is used to describe structural features of an antenna device. In the art, the term “radiation pattern” is universally used to describe the antenna gain dependence on the direction of the transmitted or received electromagnetic radiation (typically represented as two- or three-dimensional graphs in spherical coordinates). In order to avoid ambiguity and for the purposes of clarity, the examiner recommends using the term “radiating element” instead;
In multiple instances ([0014, 0015, 0038]), the term “opening end” is used. For clarity and as grammatically more correct, the examiner recommends using the term “open end” instead.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Objections
Claims 1-13 are objected to because of the following informalities:
Claims 1, 3-11 recite “radiation pattern” to describe structural features of an antenna device. In the art, the term “radiation pattern” is universally used to describe the antenna gain dependence on the direction of the transmitted or received electromagnetic radiation (typically represented as two- or three-dimensional graphs in spherical coordinates). In order to avoid ambiguity and for the purposes of clarity, the examiner recommends using the term “radiating element” instead;
Claim 3 (line 2): “an opening end” should be amended to “an open end” (see comments in the objection to the Specification above);
Claim 3 (line 8): “reduces” should be amended to “decreases”;
Claims 9 and 10: “a connection point between the second and third conductor patterns” should be amended to “the connection point between the second and third conductor patterns” (defined in claim 6);
Claim 13 (line 3): “a connection patterns” should be amended to “a connection pattern”;
Claim 13 (line 7): “a pattern width of the connection pattern” should be amended to “a width of the connection pattern”;
Claim 13 (lines 8-9): “a pattern width of the second antenna conductor pattern” should be amended to “a width of the second antenna conductor pattern”.
Claims 2 and 12 are included in the objection due to their dependence on the respective objected claims.
Appropriate correction is required.
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.
Claims 3-4 and 8 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.
Claim 3 recites: “wherein the first radiation pattern has an area whose width in the second direction gradually increases from the first feed point toward the center position and an area whose width in the second direction gradually
Claim 4 inherits the indefiniteness of claim 4 and is subsequently rejected, as well.
Claim 4 recites: “wherein a portion at which a width in the first radiation pattern becomes maximum is positioned within the range between +- l/20 from the center position”. It is not clear in what way the portion is related to the first radiation pattern – i.e., belonging or not to the first radiation pattern (e.g., “a portion of the first radiation pattern”). Further, the claim does not specify the direction in which the width of the first radiation pattern is defined. For examination purposes, in light of the examiner’s interpretation of claim3, this limitation is interpreted as follows: “the width of the first radiation pattern in the second direction becomes maximum within the range between +- l/20 from the center position”.
Claim 8 recites: “wherein a second end of the capacitive element is connected between the second inductance element and the second feed point.” It is not clear what feature the second end of the capacitive element is connected to. For examination purposes, in view of the Specification (Fig. 2) and for consistency with claim 6, this limitation is interpreted as follows: “wherein a second end of the capacitive element is connected to the connection point between the second and third conductor patterns”.
Claim 9 inherits the indefiniteness of claim 8 and is subsequently rejected, as well.
Claim 9 (lines 3-4) recites “first and second terminals”. As recited, it is not clear whether “first and second terminals” refer to a plurality of first terminals and a plurality of second terminals or to a single first terminal and a single second terminal. For examination purposes, this limitation is interpreted as follows: “a first terminal and a second terminal”.
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 1 and 5 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lo et al. (US 11050148 B2, hereinafter Lo).
Regarding claim 1, as best understood, Lo (Fig. 1) discloses an antenna device (100) comprising:
a substrate (inherent; it is well-known in the art that the elements in an antenna structure, such as the antenna structure in Fig. 1 in Lo, are not stand-alone structural features, but are disposed on a substrate for support and for securing the positions of these features relative to each other);
a ground conductor (110) formed on the substrate;
first (130 and 140) and second (120 and 150) antenna conductor patterns arranged in a ground clearance area (115) on the substrate; and
a capacitive element (C1) connecting the first and second antenna conductor patterns,
wherein the first antenna conductor pattern includes a first radiation pattern (130).
Lo does not teach a first radiation pattern extending in a first direction from a first feed point.
PNG
media_image1.png
498
810
media_image1.png
Greyscale
However, Lo (Fig. 1) teaches a radiation pattern (120) extending in a first direction (regarding the first direction, see annotated Fig. 1 in Lo below) from a first feed point (FP).
Therefore, it would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Lo so that the first antenna conductor pattern includes a first radiation pattern extending in a first direction from a first feed point. This modification would provide an antenna device having a radiation pattern in a certain direction, wherein the radiation pattern is coupled via the feed point to a signal source (see Lo, col. 3, lines 44-51).
The modified Lo does not teach the limitation wherein, when a wavelength with respect to a center frequency of an electromagnetic wave in wireless communication using the first antenna conductor pattern is l, the capacitive element is connected within a range between +- l/20 from a center position of the first radiation pattern in the first direction.
However, Lo (Fig. 1) teaches the capacitive element (C1) is connected at a center position (regarding the center position, see annotated Fig. 1 in Lo above) of the first radiation pattern (130) in the first direction. Furthermore, one skilled in the art knows that connecting a capacitive element at the center of an end of a radiation pattern (radiating element) would be beneficial, so that no undesired, unbalanced, fringe electric fields or currents are generated.
Therefore, it would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Lo so that when a wavelength with respect to a center frequency of an electromagnetic wave in wireless communication using the first antenna conductor pattern is l, the capacitive element is connected within a range between +- l/20 from a center position of the first radiation pattern in the first direction. This modification would provide the antenna device with the benefits mentioned above. Furthermore, it has been held that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or working ranges involves only routine skill in the art. In re Aller, 105 USPQ 233.
Regarding claim 5, the modified Lo teaches the antenna device of claim 1 as addressed above.
The modified Lo does not explicitly teach the limitations wherein the first antenna conductor pattern further includes a first conductor pattern connected to the first feed point, and wherein the antenna device further comprises a first inductance element connected between the first conductor pattern and the first radiation pattern.
However, Lo (Fig. 4) teaches an antenna conductor pattern (120 and 150) including a conductor pattern (120) connected to a feed point (FP), and an inductance element (473; Lo, col. 5, lines 53-58 discloses that the third circuit element 473 is an inductance element) connected between the conductor pattern (120) and a radiation pattern (150).
Therefore, it would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Lo so the first antenna conductor pattern further includes a first conductor pattern connected to the first feed point, and the antenna device further comprises a first inductance element connected between the first conductor pattern and the first radiation pattern. This modification would provide the antenna device with means for fine-tuning its impedance matching for the respective frequency bands of operation, thereby optimizing the radiation performance of the antenna device (see Lo, col, 6, lines 12-20).
Claim 2 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over the modified Lo as applied to claim 1 in view of Shimura (US 9570803 B2).
Regarding claim 2, the modified Lo teaches the antenna device of claim 1 as addressed above.
The modified Lo does not teach the limitation wherein the ground clearance area is surrounded by a first edge of the ground conductor extending in the first direction, a second edge of the ground conductor extending in a second direction perpendicular to the first direction, and edges of the substrate.
Shimura (Fig. 2) teaches an antenna device comprising a substrate (206), a ground conductor (205), and antenna conductor patterns (203, 204) arranged in a ground clearance area (regarding the ground clearance area, see annotated Fig. 2 in Shimura below) on the substrate, wherein the ground clearance area is surrounded by a first edge of the ground conductor extending in the first direction, a second edge of the ground conductor extending in a second direction perpendicular to the first direction, and edges of the substrate (regarding the first edge of the ground conductor, the second edge of the ground conductor, and the edges of the substrate, see annotated Fig. 2 in Shimura below).
PNG
media_image2.png
608
522
media_image2.png
Greyscale
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Lo so that the ground clearance area is surrounded by a first edge of the ground conductor extending in the first direction, a second edge of the ground conductor extending in a second direction perpendicular to the first direction, and edges of the substrate as taught by Shimura. This modification would provide an antenna device having antenna conductor patterns located in the appropriate portion of the substrate as dictated by the overall design and dimension constraints of the electronic device the antenna device is integrated in. In addition, a desired antenna gain pattern could be achieved since it is well-known in the art that the geometry of the ground clearance influences the antenna gain values in different directions – e.g., the antenna gain has higher values in directions which are not blocked by the ground conductor.
Claims 3-4 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over the modified Lo as applied to claim 2 in view of Suh et al. (US 20050062670 A1, hereinafter Suh).
Regarding claim 3, as best understood, the modified Lo teaches the antenna device of claim 2 as addressed above.
The modified Lo (Fig. 1) further teaches, by the virtue of the modification related to the first radiation pattern extending in the first direction from the first feed point in claim 1, the first radiation pattern has an opening end (regarding the opening end, see annotated Fig. 1 in Lo above) positioned on an opposite side of the first feed point in the first direction.
The modified Lo does not teach the limitation wherein the first radiation pattern has an area whose width in the second direction gradually increases from the first feed point toward the center position and an area whose width in the second direction gradually reduces from the center position toward the opening end.
PNG
media_image3.png
564
614
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Suh (Fig. 1) teaches and antenna device (disc monopole) comprising a radiation pattern (1) which has an area whose width in the second direction (x) gradually increases from a feed point toward a center position and an area whose width in the second direction (x) gradually reduces from the center position toward an opening end (regarding the two areas, the width, the feed point, the center position, and the opening end, see annotated Fig. 1 in Suh, below).
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Lo so that the first radiation pattern has an area whose width in the second direction gradually increases from the first feed point toward the center position and an area whose width in the second direction gradually reduces from the center position toward the opening end as taught by Suh. This modification would provide an antenna device having a very large impedance bandwidth (see Suh, [0006], lines 6-10).
Regarding claim 4, as best understood, the modified Lo teaches the antenna device of claim 3 as addressed above.
The modified Lo further teaches, by the virtue of the modification as taught by Suh in claim 3, a portion at which a width in the first radiation pattern becomes maximum (corresponding to the width, W, in the annotated Fig. 1 in Suh above) is positioned at the center position (see annotated Fig. 1 in Suh above).
Claim 13 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over the modified Lo as applied to claim 1 in view of Ying et al. (US 20260005431 A1, hereinafter Ying).
Regarding claim 13, the modified Lo teaches the antenna device of claim 1 as addressed above.
The modified Lo does not teach the limitations wherein at least one of the first and second antenna conductor patterns has a connection patterns, wherein the capacitive element is connected to the first antenna conductor pattern or second antenna conductor pattern through the connection pattern, and wherein a pattern width of the connection pattern is smaller than a pattern width of the second antenna conductor pattern.
Ying (Fig. 2, [0121]) teaches an antenna conductor pattern (3) having a connection pattern (regarding the connection pattern, see annotated Fig. 2 in Ying below), wherein a capacitive element (34; Ying, [0121] discloses that element 34 may be a capacitive element) is connected to the antenna conductor pattern through the connection pattern, and wherein a pattern width of the connection pattern is smaller than a pattern width of the antenna conductor pattern.
PNG
media_image4.png
652
492
media_image4.png
Greyscale
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Lo so that at least one of the first and second antenna conductor patterns has a connection patterns, wherein the capacitive element is connected to the first antenna conductor pattern or second antenna conductor pattern through the connection pattern, and wherein a pattern width of the connection pattern is smaller than a pattern width of the second antenna conductor pattern as taught by Ying. This modification would provide means for adjusting the equivalent electrical length of the respective antenna conductor pattern (see Ying, [0121]).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 6-7 and 10-12 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Claims 8-9 would be allowable if rewritten to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 2nd paragraph, set forth in this Office action and to include all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MARIN STOYTCHEV STOYTCHEV whose telephone number is (571)272-3467. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri, 8:00-17:00.
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 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.
/MARIN STOYTCHEV STOYTCHEV/Examiner, Art Unit 2845
/ALEXANDER H TANINGCO/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2845
Prosecution Insights