DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
1. The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . 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.
Information Disclosure Statement
2. The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 08/20/25 has been considered by the examiner.
Specification
3. The disclosure is objected to because of the following informalities: on line 6 of paragraph [0005] of the instant specification, the word "measured" should be deleted because it is redundant and superfluous, i.e., as presently understood by the examiner, in applicant's invention the temperature circuitry measures a temperature, not a measured temperature. As currently written, line 4 of page 2 implies that the temperature circuitry measures a temperature that has already been measured, i.e., two successive temperature measurements are performed, which is incorrect. Note the same problem on the second line of paragraph [0006], on line 7 of paragraph [0007], on line 11 of paragraph [0031], on line 5 of paragraph [0041], on line 8 of paragraph [0057], on the first line of paragraph [0063], and on line 5 of paragraph [0067]. On the second line of paragraph [0029], the word "provides" should be changed to --includes--. On line 9 of paragraph [0030], the word --an-- should be inserted after "In". On line 32 of paragraph [0036], "a" at the end of the line should be changed to --the--. On the second line of paragraph [0038], the second occurrence of the word "that" should be deleted. On the second line of paragraph [0039], the second occurrence of the word "that" should again be deleted. On the second line of paragraph [0042], the word "indicates" should be changed to --indicate--. On the penultimate line of paragraph [0062], the word "operation" should be changed to --operational--. On the second line of paragraph [0064], the second occurrence of the word "that" should again be deleted, and note that the same deletion should also be made on the second line of paragraph [0065]. On the first line of paragraph [0074], the word "in" should be changed to --along--. On line 4 of paragraph [0088], the word "on" should be changed to --in--. On the last line of paragraph [0090], it appears that the word "embodiments" should be changed to
--claims--.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Objections
4. Claims 1, 12 and 13 are objected to because of the following informalities:
On line 7 of claim 1, the word "measured" should be deleted.
On line 10, of claim 1, the word "coupled" should be changed to --selected-- or, alternatively, the word "selected" on line 11 of claim 1 should be changed to --coupled--, in order to provide consistency between what is recited on line 10 of claim 1 and what is recited on line 11 of claim 1.
On line 2 of claim 12, the word "measured" should be deleted.
On line 8 of claim 13, the word "measured" should be deleted.
On line 11 of claim 13, the word "coupled" should be changed to --selected-- or, alternatively, the word "selected" on line 12 of claim 13 should be changed to --coupled--, in order to provide consistency between what is recited on line 11 of claim 13 and what is recited on line 12 of claim 13.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
5. 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 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.
Claims 1-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over either Zhang et al (USP 12,665,571) or McHugh et al (USP 9,405,875) in view of Shahraini et al (USPAP 2024/0429862).
As to claim 1, both figure 2B of Zhang et al and figure 3 of McHugh et al disclose a radio frequency (RF) circuit including an acoustic filter (acoustic filter 54A in Zhang et al and acoustic filter 18 in McHugh et al), upstream/downstream RF circuitry (the circuitry to the left and to the right of filter 54A in Zhang et al and the circuitry to the left and to the right of filter 18 in McHugh et al).
Not disclosed by either of these two primary references are the limitations in claim 1 that the acoustic filter comprises first and second parallel filter paths, each path including a respective acoustic resonator, a switch device configured to selectively couple the upstream/downstream RF circuitry to the different filter paths, and temperature circuitry which detects the temperature of the filter and, in response thereto, operates the switch device so that it connects the upstream/downstream circuitry to the different filter paths.
The above-noted limitations would have been obvious, however, to one of ordinary skill in the art, the reason being that it was old and well-known in the art before the effective filing date of applicant's invention to couple a plurality of resonators having different temperature characteristics in parallel with each other, and to use a switch device to select one of the resonators based on changing temperatures of the filter device, one example of this well-known concept being disclosed by Shahraini et al, note figures 1 and 6 of this reference which shows a plurality of resonators coupled in parallel paths, each resonator having its own unique temperature characteristics, and a switch device which is responsive to the output of a temperature sensor 101 for selectively coupling the resistor having the appropriate temperature characteristics to upstream/downstream circuitry. One of ordinary skill in the art would have easily recognized that such a teaching by Shahraini et al could obviously be used in either Zhang et al or McHugh et al in order to compensate for temperature changes which would cause corresponding changes in the acoustic resonators, i.e., one of ordinary skill in the art would obviously recognize the occurrence of undesirable frequency drift versus temperature in the acoustic resonators within the acoustic filters of Zhang et al and McHugh et al, and would also obviously recognize that the teaching by Shahraini et al could be used in order to compensate for such undesirable frequency drift versus temperature. For example, if the temperature of the acoustic filter in the primary references were at a first temperature within a first range, a first acoustic resonator in the first parallel path would be selected so that it is coupled to the upstream/downstream circuitry, whereas if the temperature of the acoustic filter in the primary references were at a second temperature within a second range, a second acoustic resonator in the second parallel path would be selected so that it is coupled to the upstream/downstream circuitry, whereas if the temperature of the acoustic filter in the primary references were at a third temperature within a third range, then a third acoustic resonator in the third parallel path would be selected so that it is coupled to the upstream/downstream circuitry, etc. In this manner, even if the temperature of the acoustic filter changes (thereby resulting in frequency drift of the resonator), such could be compensated by selecting the appropriate acoustic resonator path, as taught by Shahraini et al.
As to claim 2, note that Shahraini et al discloses three different acoustic resonators three different parallel paths, as shown in figure 1 of this reference, and these three different acoustic resonators will inherently have three different temperature characteristics, and therefore there will inherently or obviously be first and second threshold temperatures corresponding to these different acoustic resonators.
As to claim 3, note that the acoustic filter in each of the above-noted primary references inherently defines a passband and such passband will inherently be shifted to higher frequencies in response to a first filter path being selected for coupling to the upstream/downstream RF circuitry, and the passband will inherently be shifted to lower frequencies in response to the second filter path being selected for coupling to the upstream/downstream RF circuitry.
As to claim 4, note that the acoustic filter in each of the above-noted primary references comprises a plurality of acoustic resonators including first and second acoustic resonators (note in particular figure 5 of Zhang et al and figure 5 of McHugh et al), and note further that the first filter path in each of the above-noted primary references is a first input filter path of the acoustic filter and the second filter path is a second input filter path of the acoustic filter, and finally note that the first input filter path and the second input filter path are connected in parallel such that the upstream/downstream RF circuitry is selectively coupled by the above-noted switch device to the acoustic filter through the first input filter path or through the second input filter path.
As to claims 5 and 6, note what is indicated at column 3, lines 5-9, of Zhang et al and also what is indicated at column 3, lines 48-53, of McHugh et al.
As to claim 7, note that figure 5 of Zhang et al and figure 5 of McHugh et al show the details of the acoustic filter, including both series paths and shunt paths including a plurality of acoustic resonators which, as noted above, can obviously be modified so as that each of the single acoustic resonators is replaced with a plurality of acoustic resonators coupled together in parallel, such that one of the plurality of resonators in parallel can be selected via a switch controlled by the output of a temperature sensor, as taught by Shahraini et al, supra.
As to claims 8 and 9, again note what is indicated at column 3, lines 5-9, of Zhang et al and also what is indicated at column 3, lines 48-53, of McHugh et al.
As to claim 10, the claimed power amplifier (PA) reads on power amplifier 42A shown in figure 2B of Zhang et al and power amplifier 34 shown in figure 3 of McHugh et al.
As to claim 11, the claimed low noise amplifier (LNA) reads on low noise amplifier 52A shown in figure 2B of Zhang et al and low noise amplifier 38 shown in figure 3 of McHugh et al.
As to claims 12-20, the limitations of these claims are rejected using the same analysis as set forth above in the rejection of claims 1-11.
Prior Art Not Relied Upon
6. The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Figure 1 of Shealy et al and figure 2-1 of Damy et al show further example of radio frequency (RF) circuitry including upstream/downstream circuitry and acoustic resonator filter circuits coupled thereto, similar to the above-noted teaching in figure 5 of Zhang et al and figure 5 of McHugh et al.
Conclusion
7. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to KENNETH B WELLS whose telephone number is (571)272-1757. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday, 8:30am-5pm.
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, REGIS J BETSCH, can be reached at (571)270-7101. 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.
/KENNETH B WELLS/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2836 July 24, 2026
Prosecution Insights