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 .
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted is being considered by the examiner.
Specification
The disclosure is objected to because of the following informalities:
Paragraph [0047] refers to "the second patches 72." The second patches are identified as element 71 throughout the remainder of the disclosure, including earlier in the same paragraph and in paragraph [0019].
Paragraph [0035] states "With reference to Figs. 1A, 2A and 2." No Figure 2A appears in the Brief Description of the Drawings or in the drawings of record.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 U.S.C. 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 17 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention. Claim 17 recites "the second patch covers the corresponding gaps." There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Claim 16, from which claim 17 depends, recites "four second patches." Claim 17 does not identify which of the four second patches is intended, or whether the limitation is directed to each of them.
For purposes of examination, the limitation has been interpreted as "each second patch covers the corresponding gaps."
Claim Rejections - 35 U.S.C. 102
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
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, 3 and 4 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by CN 112954919 A to Huang et al. (Acer Inc.), published June 11, 2021 (hereinafter "Huang").
Regarding Claim 1, Huang discloses a portable electronic device 100 which is expressly described as, for example, a notebook computer (¶[0057]), and which therefore reads on the claimed laptop computer.
Huang discloses a computer body comprising a first hinge unit and a second hinge unit. The computer body is the first body 110. The first hinge unit is the hinge module 140, which includes a first shaft 141 connected to the first body 110 and a second shaft 142 connected to the second body 120 (¶[0057], [0065]; Fig. 3C). The second hinge unit is the shaft 131c disposed along the X-axis within the first body 110, to which the pivot portion 131d of the antenna unit 131 is pivotally connected (¶[0061]; Figs. 2A, 3A).
Huang discloses a cover, rotatably connected to the computer body via the first hinge unit. The second body 120 carries the display (¶[0067]) and is rotatable relative to the first body 110 through the hinge module 140 between a closed state and an unfolded state (¶[0057]; Figs. 1A, 1B).
Huang discloses an antenna bracket, rotatably connected to the computer body via the second hinge unit. The main body 131a of the antenna unit 131 is carried on the shaft 131c through the pivot portion 131d and rotates relative to the first body 110, flipping outward from the bottom surface of the first body 110 (¶[0057], [0061], [0063]; Figs. 1A, 1B, 4A, 4B).
Huang discloses an antenna module, disposed on the antenna bracket and configured to transmit a wireless signal. The antenna unit 131 is a radiating antenna carried on the main body 131a. Huang's stated purpose is to move the antenna away from the metal chassis so as to improve radiation efficiency and thereby the wireless communication quality of the device (¶[0002]–[0005], [0007], [0057], [0074]). A structure whose stated function is to radiate with improved efficiency necessarily includes a radiating element configured to transmit a wireless signal. See MPEP 2112.
Further, it is well established in the art that a movable antenna carried on the base of a portable computer and deployable away from the computer housing is provided for the purpose of transmitting and receiving wireless signals free of the obstruction and shielding caused by the computer housing. See, e.g., Madsen (US 6,181,284 B1), col. 1–2 and col. 8.
Regarding claim 3, Huang further discloses that the computer body comprises a first surface and a second surface, the first surface opposite the second surface. The first body 110 has surfaces 111 and 112, with surface 112 facing and substantially contacting surface 122 of the second body 120 in the closed state (¶[0067]; Fig. 4A), and an opposite bottom surface from which the antenna unit 131 flips outward (¶[0057], [0068]).
Huang discloses that the cover is configured to cover the first surface: in the closed state the second body 120 is stacked on the first body 110 (¶[0068]; Fig. 4A).
Huang discloses that the antenna bracket is configured to cover the second surface: in the closed state the antenna unit 131 is concealed in the bottom surface of the first body 110, having an outline conforming to that bottom surface (¶[0057]).
Huang discloses an input interface disposed on the first surface. Huang's device 100 is a notebook computer (¶[0057]) having a first body 110 that supports the second body 120 carrying the display. A keyboard or equivalent input interface on the upper surface of the base is a necessary attribute of such a device. See MPEP 2112.
Alternatively, Official Notice is taken that it is well known in the art that the base portion of a notebook computer includes a keyboard or other input interface on its upper surface.
Regarding Claim 4, Huang further discloses that in a first spatial posture, the antenna bracket is in a first bracket position and overlaps the computer body. In the closed (folded) state, the antenna unit 131 is concealed within and conforms to the bottom surface of the first body 110 (¶[0057]; Figs. 1A, 2A, 4A).
Huang discloses that in a second spatial posture, the antenna bracket is in a second bracket position and forms a V-shaped structure with the computer body in a side projection plane. In the unfolded state, the antenna unit 131 is flipped outward from the bottom surface of the first body 110 at an angle thereto, defining a space G3 between the bottom surface of the first body 110 and the platform 200 (¶[0063], [0068]; Figs. 1B, 2B, 2D, 3C, 4B). As shown in Fig. 4B, the first body 110 and the outwardly flipped antenna unit 131 converge at the pivot and diverge away from it, forming a V-shaped configuration in the side projection.
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.
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claim 7 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Huang in view of Kough et al. (US 8,508,418 B2, hereinafter "Kough").
Regarding Claim 7, Huang discloses the laptop computer of claim 4 as set forth above, including a cover (second body 120) carrying a display (¶[0067]). Huang does not expressly disclose that the cover comprises a screen and a lid on which the screen is disposed, that the lid comprises a non-metallic material, or that the wireless signal passes through at least a portion of the cover.
Kough discloses a portable computer 10 having a housing 12 with an upper housing 12A, referred to as a lid or cover, and a lower housing 12B, the upper and lower housings being pivotably attached by hinges 13, wherein a display 14 is mounted in upper housing 12A. Kough thereby discloses a cover comprising a screen and a lid, the screen being disposed on the lid.
Kough further discloses that the housing may be formed of plastic, glass, ceramics or other suitable materials, and that the housing may be a dielectric or other low-conductivity material so that the operation of conductive antenna elements located in proximity to the housing is not disrupted. Kough teaches that when the housing is formed from conductive material such as metal, it acts as a conductive shield that impedes the passage of radio-frequency signals from nearby antennas, and that a housing portion may accordingly be formed from dielectric materials so that radio-frequency signals can pass through it, such a dielectric housing portion serving as a dielectric window for the antenna. Kough further discloses antennas formed in upper housing 12A.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to form the cover of the Huang laptop computer with a lid comprising a non-metallic material, through at least a portion of which the wireless signal passes, as taught by Kough.
Both Huang and Kough address the same problem: Huang states that the metal housings increasingly used in portable electronic devices produce a coupling effect with the antenna element that reduces radiation efficiency and degrades wireless communication quality (¶[0002]), and Kough likewise teaches that a conductive housing acts as a shield impeding the passage of radio-frequency signals. One of ordinary skill would have been motivated to adopt Kough's solution of forming the housing portion of a dielectric or other non-metallic material so as to permit radio-frequency signals to pass through rather than be shielded, thereby obtaining the improved radiation efficiency that is Huang's stated objective (Huang ¶[0005], [0007], [0074]).
Claims 8 and 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Huang in view of Murdock et al. (US 10,044,111 B2, hereinafter "Murdock"), and further in view of Lim et al. (US 10,854,978 B2, hereinafter "Lim") as to claim 18.
Regarding Claim 8, Huang discloses the laptop computer of claim 1 as set forth above, including an antenna module disposed on the antenna bracket and configured to transmit a wireless signal. Huang does not expressly disclose the internal structure of the antenna module.
Murdock discloses a wideband dual-polarized patch antenna comprising:
a feeding unit, comprising a horizontal feeding conductor and a vertical feeding conductor. Murdock discloses first and second feed lines 130 and 134 electrically connected to the radiator patches and to the ground plane, wherein feed line 130 is a horizontal feed line and feed line 134 is a vertical feed line, the two feed lines being oriented at substantially a 90 degree angle relative to each other so as to excite the antenna in two separate directions and produce two linear orthogonal polarizations.
a ground layer, corresponding to the feeding unit. Ground plane 120, to which the outer conductor of the coaxial feed lines is connected.
a first patch unit, corresponding to the feeding unit. Radiator patch 112, disposed above ground plane 120 and separated therefrom by dielectric substrate 116C.
a second patch unit, corresponding to the feeding unit and the first patch unit, wherein the first patch unit is located between the second patch unit and the feeding unit. Radiator patches 108 and 104 are disposed above radiator patch 112 and separated therefrom by dielectric substrates, such that radiator patch 112 lies between the overlying radiator patches and the ground plane 120 through which the feed lines pass.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to implement the antenna module of Huang using the stacked dual-polarized patch structure of Murdock. Murdock teaches that stacking multiple radiator patches achieves a wide half-power bandwidth and high gain, that dual polarization provides two transmission channels in the same frequency band, and that the multi-layer PCB construction without air gaps is structurally rigid and readily manufactured. One of ordinary skill would have been motivated to adopt this structure in Huang's antenna unit 131 to obtain these bandwidth, gain and manufacturability advantages, particularly given Huang's stated objective of improving the radiation efficiency of an antenna in a portable electronic device (Huang ¶[0002]–[0005], [0007]).
Claim 18, the combination of Huang and Murdock discloses a ground layer, a feeding unit and a first patch unit as set forth above. To the extent it may be argued that Murdock does not expressly disclose that the ground layer is located between the feeding unit and the first patch unit, Lim discloses an antenna apparatus in which patch antenna feed lines are disposed on an opposite side of the ground layer from the patch antenna patterns and are electrically connected to the patch antenna patterns through feed vias passing through a through-hole in the ground layer, such that the ground layer lies between the feed lines and the patch antenna pattern.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to arrange the feed structure of the Huang-Murdock combination as taught by Lim. Lim teaches that this arrangement improves electromagnetic isolation between the patch antenna pattern and the underlying feed and interconnect structure, and permits the ground layer to serve as a reflector that concentrates the radiated signal in the direction away from the ground layer, thereby improving antenna performance.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 2, 5, 6 and 9 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 10–17 are objected to as being dependent upon claim 9, and would be allowable if claim 9 were rewritten in independent form as set forth above, subject to resolution of the rejection of claim 17 under 35 U.S.C. 112(b).
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
Regarding claim 2, the closest prior art of record, Huang, discloses a first hinge unit (hinge module 140) whose rotation axis is the Y-axis and a second hinge unit (shaft 131c) extending along the X-axis (¶[0057], [0060], [0061]). These axes are mutually orthogonal, and the two hinge units are accordingly located at different sides of the computer body. The prior art of record neither discloses nor renders obvious a laptop computer in which the computer body comprises a body lateral side and both the first hinge unit and the second hinge unit are disposed on that same body lateral side, in combination with the remaining limitations of claim 1.
Regarding claims 5 and 6, the prior art of record neither discloses nor renders obvious a cover comprising a screen and a phase modulation module in which the phase modulation module is disposed opposite the screen, and, in a third spatial posture in which the cover is open relative to the computer body and the antenna bracket is in the second bracket position, is configured to perform phase modulation on at least a portion of the wireless signal, in combination with the remaining limitations of claims 1, 3 and 4.
Regarding claim 9, the closest prior art of record, Murdock, discloses a feeding unit in which a single feed conductor conveys a horizontally polarized signal and a single feed conductor conveys a vertically polarized signal to a patch antenna pattern. Lim similarly discloses a plurality of feed vias connected to a single patch antenna pattern conveying horizontally and vertically polarized signals. The prior art of record neither discloses nor renders obvious a horizontal feeding conductor comprising a first horizontal feeding structure and a second horizontal feeding structure arranged along a vertical line, in combination with a vertical feeding conductor comprising a first vertical feeding structure and a second vertical feeding structure arranged along a horizontal line, together with the remaining limitations of claims 1 and 8.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MONICA C KING whose telephone number is (571)270-3429. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri.
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 H. 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.
/MONICA C KING/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2844
9/4/2025
Prosecution Insights