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, filed 9/2/2025, have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant argues that Kobayashi and Maccioni fail to disclose the feature "a differential amplifying circuit, coupled to a common-mode voltage, said first sensing device, and said second sensing device, and generating an output signal by a differential compensation according to said common-mode voltage, said first sensing signal, and said second sensing signal while said common-mode voltage, said first sensing signal, and said second sensing signal are respectively provided to said differential amplifying circuit," as is now recited by amended Claim 1 of this Application.
The examiner respectfully disagrees. Maccioni teaches a common-mode voltage coupled to the differential amplifier. The presence of a common mode voltage in Maccioni’s invention implicates that a common mode voltage is being injected into the differential amplifier. The claim language states, “…said common-mode voltage, said first sensing signal, and said second sensing signal are respectively provided to said differential amplifying circuit” and Maccioni teaches said signals being provided respectively to the differential amplifier.
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include a common-mode voltage in Kobayashi’s design in order to apply said common-mode voltage, in combination with the signals from the sensing circuits, to the differential amplifier and outputting a signal in accordance with Maccioni’s design.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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 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 1-4 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kobayashi in view of Maccioni et al. (US 20210011066 A1), hereinafter Maccioni.
Regarding Independent Claim 1, Kobayashi teaches,
A sensing circuit with signal compensation, comprising:
a first sensing device (sensor circuit 50A, Fig. 5), receiving a first driving voltage, and generating a first sensing signal;
a second sensing device (sensor circuit 50B, Fig. 5), receiving a second driving voltage, and generating a second sensing signal; and
a differential amplifying circuit (amplifier 34, Fig. 6), coupled to a common-mode voltage, said first sensing device, and said second sensing device, and generating an output signal by a differential compensation according to said common-mode voltage, said first sensing signal, and said second sensing signal while said common-mode voltage, said first sensing signal, and said second sensing signal are respectively provided to said differential amplifying circuit.
Kobayashi is silent regarding,
a differential amplifying circuit, coupled to a common-mode voltage, said first sensing device, and said second sensing device, and generating an output signal by a differential compensation according to said common-mode voltage, said first sensing signal, and said second sensing signal while said common-mode voltage, said first sensing signal, and said second sensing signal are respectively provided to said differential amplifying circuit.
Maccioni further teaches,
a differential amplifying circuit (differential amplifier 430, Fig. 4A), coupled to a common-mode voltage (common mode voltage VCM, coupled through switches that are operated alternately by phase-shifted control signals P1 and P2, Fig. 4A, See paragraph [0040]), said first sensing device, and said second sensing device, and generating an output signal by a differential compensation (Signal generated by the differential amplifier 430, See paragraph [0040]) according to said common-mode voltage, said first sensing signal, and said second sensing signal while said common-mode voltage, said first sensing signal, and said second sensing signal are respectively provided to said differential amplifying circuit.
(Maccioni teaches a common-mode voltage coupled to the differential amplifier. The presence of a common mode voltage in Maccioni’s invention implicates that a common mode voltage is being injected into the differential amplifier. The claim language states, “…said common-mode voltage, said first sensing signal, and said second sensing signal are respectively provided to said differential amplifying circuit” and Maccioni teaches said signals being provided respectively to the differential amplifier.)
Kobayashi and Maccioni are both considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because they are in the same field of power amplifiers and sensing circuits. It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include a common-mode voltage in Kobayashi’s design in order to apply said common-mode voltage, in combination with the signals from the sensing circuits, to the differential amplifier and outputting a signal in accordance with Maccioni’s design.
Regarding claim 2, Kobayashi and Maccioni teach all the limitations of claim 1 on which this claim depends. Kobayashi further teaches:
The sensing circuit with signal compensation of claim 1, further comprising:
a first capacitor bank (capacitor C1, Fig. 3), coupled between said first sensing device and said differential amplifying circuit, and including one or more first matching capacitor; and
a second capacitor bank (capacitor C2, Fig. 3), coupled between said second sensing device and said differential amplifying circuit, and including one or more second matching capacitor.
Regarding claim 3, Kobayashi and Maccioni teach all the limitations of claim 1 on which this claim depends. Kobayashi further teaches:
a differential amplifier (amplifier 22, Fig. 3), including a first input, a second input, a third input, a first output, and a second output, said first input receiving said first sensing signal of said first sensing device, said second input receiving said second sensing signal of said second sensing device, and said third input receiving said common-mode voltage;
a first capacitor (capacitor Cf, Fig. 3), coupled between said first input and said first output of said differential amplifier, and corresponding to said first sensing signal of said first sensing device; and
a second capacitor (capacitor Cf, Fig. 3), coupled between said second input and said second output of said differential amplifier, and corresponding to said second sensing signal of said second sensing device;
where said differential amplifying circuit generates said output signal according to said common-mode voltage, sad first sensing signal, and said second sensing signal.
Regarding claim 4, Kobayashi and Maccioni teach all the limitations of claim 3 on which this claim depends. Kobayashi further teaches:
The sensing circuit with signal compensation of claim 3, further comprising:
a first switch (switch SW5, Fig. 3), coupled to said first capacitor, and coupled to said first input and said first output of said differential amplifier; and
a second switch (switch SW6, Fig. 3), coupled to said second capacitor, and coupled to said second input and said second output of said differential amplifier
Claims 5 and 6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kobayashi and Maccioni in view of Lin et al. (US 20130154997 A1), hereinafter Lin.
Regarding claim 5, Kobayashi and Maccioni teach all the limitations of claim 1 on which this claim depends. Kobayashi and Maccioni are silent regarding:
The sensing circuit with signal compensation of claim 1, further comprising a first switching circuit, including:
a third switch, with one terminal coupled to said first sensing device and the other terminal coupled to a first ground;
a fourth switch, with one terminal coupled to said first sensing device and the other terminal coupled to a first driving voltage; and
a fifth switch, with one terminal coupled to said first sensing device and the other terminal coupled to said differential amplifying circuit.
Lin teaches:
The sensing circuit with signal compensation of claim 1, further comprising a first switching circuit (combination of switches SW1, SW5, and SW7, Fig. 2), including:
a third switch (switch SW1, Fig. 2), with one terminal coupled to said first sensing device and the other terminal coupled to a first ground;
a fourth switch (switch SW5, Fig. 2), with one terminal coupled to said first sensing device and the other terminal coupled to a first driving voltage; and
a fifth switch (switch SW7, Fig. 2), with one terminal coupled to said first sensing device and the other terminal coupled to said differential amplifying circuit.
Kobayashi, Maccioni, and Lin are considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because they are in the same field of power amplifiers and sensing circuits. It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include a first switch circuit composing a plurality of switches in Kobayashi’s design in order to couple different components of the circuit, furthermore, increasing the efficiency of the sensing circuit in accordance with Lin’s design.
Regarding claim 6, Kobayashi and Maccioni teach all the limitations of claim 1 on which this claim depends. Kobayashi and Maccioni further teaches:
The sensing circuit with signal compensation of claim 1, further comprising a second switching circuit, including:
a sixth switch, with one terminal coupled to said second sensing device and the other terminal coupled to a second ground;
a seventh switch, with one terminal coupled to said second sensing device and the other terminal coupled to a second driving voltage; and
an eighth switch, with one terminal coupled to said second sensing device and the other terminal coupled to said differential amplifying circuit.
Lin teaches:
The sensing circuit with signal compensation of claim 1, further comprising a second switching circuit (combination of switches SW2, SW6, and SW8, Fig. 2), including:
a sixth switch (switch SW2, Fig. 2), with one terminal coupled to said second sensing device and the other terminal coupled to a second ground;
a seventh switch (switch SW6, Fig. 2), with one terminal coupled to said second sensing device and the other terminal coupled to a second driving voltage; and
an eighth switch (switch SW8, Fig. 2), with one terminal coupled to said second sensing device and the other terminal coupled to said differential amplifying circuit.
Kobayashi, Maccioni, and Lin are considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because they are in the same field of power amplifiers and sensing circuits. It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include a second switch circuit composing a plurality of switches in Kobayashi’s design in order to couple different components of the circuit, furthermore, increasing the efficiency of the sensing circuit in accordance with Lin’s design.
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. 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 JOSE E PINERO whose telephone number is (703)756-4746. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8:00 AM - 5:00 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, Andrea Lindgren Baltzell can be reached on (571) 272-5918. 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.
/JOSE E PINERO/Examiner, Art Unit 2843
/ANDREA LINDGREN BALTZELL/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2843