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 .
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1 and 3 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any combination of reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
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.
Claim 1 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hashidate et al. (US6992634; hereinafter Hashidate) in view of Oladeinde et al. (US20190207314; hereinafter Olandiende).
Regarding claim 1, Hashidate discloses “An electronic device, comprising an antenna cluster, wherein the antenna cluster comprises at least two antennas (33/34) arranged in sequence, each antenna corresponds to a feed point (33a/35), the feed point is electrically connected to a feed structure, any two adjacent antennas of the at least two antennas are at least partially arranged in sleeving mode (see fig. 1), and any two adjacent antennas of the at least two antennas are spaced apart (gap between 33 and 34); wherein the at least two antennas comprise a first antenna (34) and a second antenna (33), and the first antenna is at least partially arranged in the second antenna in sleeving mode (fig. 1); the second antenna is a loop antenna (33 is a loop antenna), a fifth feed point (33a) and a second ground point (33b) are arranged at two ends of the second antenna respectively, and the third feed point (35) is adjacent to and spaced apart from both the fifth feed point and the second ground point (fig. 1)”.
Hashidate does not disclose “wherein the first antenna is provided with a third feed point and a fourth feed point, the third feed point and the fourth feed point are respectively located at diagonal positions of the first antenna, and the third feed point and the fourth feed point are connected to a feed structure that transmits feed signals of different frequency bands”.
However, Olandeinde teaches “wherein the first antenna (100) is provided with a third feed point (106) and a fourth feed point (108), the third feed point and the fourth feed point are respectively located at diagonal positions of the first antenna (fig. 1), and the third feed point and the fourth feed point are connected to a feed structure that transmits feed signals of different frequency bands ([0021]; The dimensions of the patch 102 can be configured to resonate at a particular wavelength (e.g., frequency). In one or more examples, the patch 102 can include one or more polarization directions. In other words, the size and shape of the patch 102 can be configured to resonate at a particular frequency along one or more directions of the patch 102. For instance, in the example of FIG. 1, the length of the patch 102 can be about one-quarter of the particular wavelength of the transmitted or received signal. The width of the patch 102 can be shorter than the length of the patch 102 and therefore be tuned to a correspondingly smaller wavelength signal (e.g., higher frequency). Accordingly, the patch 102 can be tuned to transmit or receive signals at one or more particular frequencies along a corresponding number of polarization directions. For instance, the length of the patch can correspond to a vertical polarization direction (e.g., a first polarization direction 112) and the width of the patch 102 can correspond to a horizontal polarization direction (e.g., a second polarization direction 114). In one example, the patch 102 can be sized and shaped to include three or more polarization direction, such as a hexagonal patch, octagonal patch, or the like. The dimensions of the patch 102 can be tuned to transmit or receive signals in the 500 MHz to 100 GHz range, for instance, 24 GHz, 28 GHz, 39 GHz, 60 GHz, 73 GHz, or other frequency. In the example of the patch 102 tuned to 30 GHz, the patch 102 can include a width of 2.54 mm and a length of 2.54 mm)”.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to apply the teachings of Olandeinde and make Hashidate’s electronic device wherein the first antenna is provided with a third feed point and a fourth feed point, the third feed point and the fourth feed point are respectively located at diagonal positions of the first antenna, and the third feed point and the fourth feed point are connected to a feed structure that transmits feed signals of different frequency bands, in order to cross feed the first antenna.
Claims 2, 6, 9-10, and 12-13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hashidate in view of Olandeinde, further in view of Kuramoto et al. (JP7065688; hereinafter Kuramoto).
Regarding claim 2, Hashidate discloses the electronic device according to claim 1 as shown previously.
Hashidate does not disclose “wherein the electronic device comprises a main board, a cover plate, and a frame, wherein the main board and the cover plate are spaced apart, an accommodating cavity is formed and enclosed by the main board, the cover plate, and the frame, the antenna cluster is located in the accommodating cavity, the feed structure corresponding to each antenna comprised in the antenna cluster is located on the main board, and a radiator of each antenna comprised in the antenna cluster is arranged toward the cover plate”.
However, Kuramoto teaches “wherein the electronic device comprises a main board (12), a cover plate (cover in fig. 4), and a frame (13), wherein the main board and the cover plate are spaced apart, an accommodating cavity is formed and enclosed by the main board (space between 13 and 16), the cover plate, and the frame, the antenna cluster is located in the accommodating cavity (14/15 are in the cavity), the feed structure corresponding to each antenna comprised in the antenna cluster is located on the main board (FP1-3 is on 12), and a radiator of each antenna comprised in the antenna cluster is arranged toward the cover plate (arranged on top in fig. 3 towards cover)”.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to apply the teachings of Kuramoto and make Hashidate’s electronic device wherein the electronic device comprises a main board, a cover plate, and a frame, wherein the main board and the cover plate are spaced apart, an accommodating cavity is formed and enclosed by the main board, the cover plate, and the frame, the antenna cluster is located in the accommodating cavity, the feed structure corresponding to each antenna comprised in the antenna cluster is located on the main board, and a radiator of each antenna comprised in the antenna cluster is arranged toward the cover plate, in order to cover, protect, and support the antenna and other electronic components.
Regarding claim 6, Hashidate discloses the electronic device according to claim 1 as shown previously.
Hashidate does not disclose “wherein the first antenna and the second antenna are both C-shaped antennas, a sixth feed point and a seventh feed point are arranged at two ends of the first antenna respectively, an eighth feed point and a ninth feed point are arranged at two ends of the second antenna respectively, the sixth feed point is adjacent to and spaced apart from the eighth feed point, and the seventh feed point is adjacent to and arranged opposite to the ninth feed point”.
However, Kuramoto teaches “wherein the first antenna and the second antenna are both C-shaped antennas (14/15), a sixth feed point (FP2) and a seventh feed point (P5) are arranged at two ends of the first antenna respectively, an eighth feed point (FP3) and a ninth feed point (P10) are arranged at two ends of the second antenna respectively, the sixth feed point is adjacent to and spaced apart from the eighth feed point, and the seventh feed point is adjacent to and arranged opposite to the ninth feed point (fig. 3)”.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to apply the teachings of Kuramoto and make Hashidate’s electronic device wherein the first antenna and the second antenna are both C-shaped antennas, a sixth feed point and a seventh feed point are arranged at two ends of the first antenna respectively, an eighth feed point and a ninth feed point are arranged at two ends of the second antenna respectively, the sixth feed point is adjacent to and spaced apart from the eighth feed point, and the seventh feed point is adjacent to and arranged opposite to the ninth feed point, in order to feed both of the antenna units the signal.
Regarding claim 9, Hashidate discloses the electronic device according to claim 1 as shown previously.
Hashidate does not disclose “wherein the first antenna and the second antenna are both loop antennas, a fourteenth feed point and a fourth ground point are arranged at two ends of the first antenna respectively, a fifteenth feed point and a fifth ground point are arranged at two ends of the second antenna, and the fifth ground point, the fourth ground point, the fourteenth feed point, and the fifteenth feed point are sequentially spaced apart”.
However, Kuramoto teaches “wherein the first antenna and the second antenna are both loop antennas (14/15), a fourteenth feed point (FP2) and a fourth ground point (P5) are arranged at two ends of the first antenna (14) respectively, a fifteenth feed point (FP3) and a fifth ground point (P10) are arranged at two ends of the second antenna (15), and the fifth ground point, the fourth ground point, the fourteenth feed point, and the fifteenth feed point are sequentially spaced apart (fig. 3)”.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to apply the teachings of Kuramoto and make Hashidate’s electronic device wherein the first antenna and the second antenna are both loop antennas, a fourteenth feed point and a fourth ground point are arranged at two ends of the first antenna respectively, a fifteenth feed point and a fifth ground point are arranged at two ends of the second antenna, and the fifth ground point, the fourth ground point, the fourteenth feed point, and the fifteenth feed point are sequentially spaced apart, in order to feed both of the antenna units the signal.
Regarding claim 10, Hashidate discloses the electronic device according to claim 1 as shown previously.
Hashidate does not disclose “wherein a sixteenth feed point and a seventeenth feed point are arranged at two ends of the first antenna respectively, an eighteenth feed point and a sixth ground point are arranged at two ends of the second antenna respectively, and the sixth ground point, the sixteenth feed point, the seventeenth feed point, and the eighteenth feed point are sequentially spaced apart”.
However, Kuramoto teaches “wherein a sixteenth feed point (FP2) and a seventeenth feed point (P5) are arranged at two ends of the first antenna (14) respectively, an eighteenth feed point (FP3) and a sixth ground point (P10) are arranged at two ends of the second antenna (15) respectively, and the sixth ground point, the sixteenth feed point, the seventeenth feed point, and the eighteenth feed point are sequentially spaced apart (fig. 3)”.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to apply the teachings of Kuramoto and make Hashidate’s electronic device wherein a sixteenth feed point and a seventeenth feed point are arranged at two ends of the first antenna respectively, an eighteenth feed point and a sixth ground point are arranged at two ends of the second antenna respectively, and the sixth ground point, the sixteenth feed point, the seventeenth feed point, and the eighteenth feed point are sequentially spaced apart, in order to feed both of the antenna units the signal.
Regarding claim 12, Hashidate discloses the electronic device according to claim 10 as shown previously.
Hashidate does not disclose “wherein the first antenna and the second antenna are both loop antennas”.
However, Kuramoto teaches “wherein the first antenna and the second antenna are both loop antennas (14/15)”.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to apply the teachings of Kuramoto and make Hashidate’s electronic device wherein the first antenna and the second antenna are both loop antennas, in order to produce the desired radiation pattern.
Regarding claim 13, Hashidate discloses the electronic device according to claim 1 as shown previously.
Hashidate does not disclose “wherein a nineteenth feed point and a twentieth feed point are arranged at two ends of the first antenna respectively, a twenty-first feed point and a twenty- second feed point are arranged at two ends of the second antenna respectively, and the twenty-first feed point, the nineteenth feed point, the twentieth feed point, and the twenty-second feed point are sequentially spaced apart”.
However, Kuramoto teaches “wherein a nineteenth feed point (FP2) and a twentieth feed point (P5) are arranged at two ends of the first antenna (14) respectively, a twenty-first feed point (FP3) and a twenty- second feed point (P10) are arranged at two ends of the second antenna (15) respectively, and the twenty-first feed point, the nineteenth feed point, the twentieth feed point, and the twenty-second feed point are sequentially spaced apart (fig. 3)”.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to apply the teachings of Kuramoto and make Hashidate’s electronic device wherein a nineteenth feed point and a twentieth feed point are arranged at two ends of the first antenna respectively, a twenty-first feed point and a twenty- second feed point are arranged at two ends of the second antenna respectively, and the twenty-first feed point, the nineteenth feed point, the twentieth feed point, and the twenty-second feed point are sequentially spaced apart, in order to feed both of the antenna units the signal.
Claims 4, 7-8, and 16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable Hashidate in view of Olandeinde, further in view of Hong et al. (TWI683478; hereinafter Hong).
Regarding claim 4, Hashidate discloses the electronic device according to claim 3 as shown previously.
Hashidate does not disclose “wherein the first antenna is a patch antenna, a first feed point is arranged in a first corner position of the first antenna, the second antenna is a loop antenna, a second feed point and a first ground point are arranged at two ends of the second antenna respectively, and any two of the first feed point, the second feed point, and the first ground point are adjacent and spaced apart”.
However, Hong teaches “wherein the first antenna is a patch antenna (170), a first feed point is arranged in a first corner position of the first antenna (192), the second antenna is a loop antenna (130), a second feed point (191) and a first ground point (151) are arranged at two ends of the second antenna respectively, and any two of the first feed point, the second feed point, and the first ground point are adjacent and spaced apart (fig. 1a)”.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to apply the teachings of Hong and make Hashidate’s electronic device wherein the first antenna is a patch antenna, a first feed point is arranged in a first corner position of the first antenna, the second antenna is a loop antenna, a second feed point and a first ground point are arranged at two ends of the second antenna respectively, and any two of the first feed point, the second feed point, and the first ground point are adjacent and spaced apart, in order to properly feed the antennas and produce the desired radiation pattern.
Regarding claim 7, Hashidate discloses the electronic device according to claim 1 as shown previously.
Hashidate does not disclose “wherein the first antenna is a rectangular antenna, the first antenna is provided with a tenth feed point, the second antenna is a loop antenna, an eleventh feed point and a third ground point are arranged at two ends of the second antenna respectively, the tenth feed point is located between the eleventh feed point and the third ground point, and the tenth feed point is adjacent to and spaced apart from the eleventh feed point and the third ground point respectively”.
However, Hong teaches “wherein the first antenna is a rectangular antenna (170), the first antenna is provided with a tenth feed point (192), the second antenna is a loop antenna (130), an eleventh feed point (191) and a third ground point (151) are arranged at two ends of the second antenna respectively, the tenth feed point is located between the eleventh feed point and the third ground point, and the tenth feed point is adjacent to and spaced apart from the eleventh feed point and the third ground point respectively (fig. 1a)”.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to apply the teachings of Hong and make Hashidate’s electronic device wherein the first antenna is a rectangular antenna, the first antenna is provided with a tenth feed point, the second antenna is a loop antenna, an eleventh feed point and a third ground point are arranged at two ends of the second antenna respectively, the tenth feed point is located between the eleventh feed point and the third ground point, and the tenth feed point is adjacent to and spaced apart from the eleventh feed point and the third ground point respectively, in order to properly feed the antennas and produce the desired radiation pattern.
Regarding claim 8, Hashidate discloses the electronic device according to claim 1 as shown previously.
Hashidate does not disclose “wherein the first antenna is a rectangular antenna, the first antenna is provided with a twelfth feed point, the second antenna is a loop antenna, the second antenna is provided with a thirteenth feed point, and the twelfth feed point is adjacent to and spaced apart from the thirteenth feed point”.
However, Hong teaches “wherein the first antenna is a rectangular antenna (170), the first antenna is provided with a twelfth feed point (192), the second antenna is a loop antenna (130), the second antenna is provided with a thirteenth feed point (191), and the twelfth feed point is adjacent to and spaced apart from the thirteenth feed point (fig. 1a)”.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to apply the teachings of Hong and make Hashidate’s electronic device wherein the first antenna is a rectangular antenna, the first antenna is provided with a twelfth feed point, the second antenna is a loop antenna, the second antenna is provided with a thirteenth feed point, and the twelfth feed point is adjacent to and spaced apart from the thirteenth feed point, in order to properly feed the antennas and produce the desired radiation pattern.
Regarding claim 16, Hashidate discloses the electronic device according to claim 1 as shown previously.
Hashidate does not disclose “wherein there are a plurality of antenna clusters, and the plurality of antenna clusters are located at different positions of the electronic device”.
However, Hong teaches “wherein there are a plurality of antenna clusters, and the plurality of antenna clusters are located at different positions of the electronic device (units 671 and 672)”.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to apply the teachings of Hong and make Hashidate’s electronic device wherein there are a plurality of antenna clusters, and the plurality of antenna clusters are located at different positions of the electronic device, in order to improve reception in multiple orientations.
Claims 11 and 14-15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hashidate in view of Olandeinde, further in view of Kuramoto and Hong.
Regarding claim 11, the modified Hashidate discloses the electronic device according to claim 10 as shown previously.
The modified Hashidate does not disclose “wherein the first antenna is a rectangular antenna, and the second antenna is a loop antenna”.
However, Hong teaches “wherein the first antenna is a rectangular antenna (170), and the second antenna is a loop antenna (130)”.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to apply the teachings of Hong and make Hashidate’s electronic device wherein the first antenna is a rectangular antenna, and the second antenna is a loop antenna, in order to produce the desired radiation pattern.
Regarding claim 14, the modified Hashidate discloses the electronic device according to claim 13 as shown previously.
The modified Hashidate does not disclose “wherein the first antenna is a rectangular antenna, and the second antenna is a C-shaped antenna”.
However, Hong teaches “wherein the first antenna is a rectangular antenna (170), and the second antenna is a C-shaped antenna (130)”.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to apply the teachings of Hong and make Hashidate’s electronic device wherein the first antenna is a rectangular antenna, and the second antenna is a C-shaped antenna, in order to produce the desired radiation pattern.
Regarding claim 15, the modified Hashidate discloses the electronic device according to claim 13 as shown previously.
The modified Hashidate does not disclose “wherein the first antenna is a rectangular antenna, and the second antenna is a loop antenna”.
However, Hong teaches “wherein the first antenna is a rectangular antenna (170), and the second antenna is a loop antenna (130)”.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to apply the teachings of Hong and make Hashidate’s electronic device wherein the first antenna is a rectangular antenna, and the second antenna is a loop antenna, in order to produce the desired radiation pattern.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). 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.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to AUSTIN MICHAEL BACK whose telephone number is (703)756-4521. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 8 AM - 5 PM ET.
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.
/AUSTIN M BACK/Examiner, Art Unit 2845
/DIMARY S LOPEZ CRUZ/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2845
