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 01/14/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive for claims 1 and 5-8. Applicant’s arguments and amendments are persuasive for claims 3, 4, 21 and 23-34.
With respect to claims 1 and 5-8. The Examiner agrees with Applicant’s technical description of the prior art. However, the description of the differences between Applicant’s invention and the prior art is not embodied in the claims. For example, Applicant states that the “thermistor 21” signal “goes straight from the thermistor to the A/D convertor”. There is nothing in claim 1 which prohibits such an arrangement. In fact, it is specifically described in page 7 that only claims “21 and 32 explicitly recite that the anti-drift system is coupled to the temperature sensor”.
The second argument is similarly moot with respect to Li. The Examiner agrees that “Li fails to disclose an anti-drift system comprising amplification and filter stages that process a temperature signal”. This is similarly not required by claim 1.
Applicant’s further arguments follow similarly with respect to the claimed components not interacting with the temperature signal. However, claim 1 merely requires disparate circuit elements and does not require such an arrangement.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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.
(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.
Claim(s) 1 and 5 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by CN 107037840 (hereinafter Li).
Li teaches:
Regarding claims 1 and 5
A temperature control system, comprising: a temperature monitor system configured to generate a temperature signal (abstract), wherein the temperature monitor system comprises: a temperature sensor signal generator configured to output a temperature sensor signal (Thermistor 21 is connected to controlling processor 22); an anti-drift system (the circuitry disclosed is together the circuitry that prevents “wavelength drift” specifically focusing on the feedback circuitry of Figs. 3, 5 and 6 in this Office Action), the anti-drift system comprising: a first amplification stage (101); a second amplification stage (A1) ;a first filter stage (31); and a second filter stage (32) wherein at least one of the first amlplification stage, the second amplification stage, the first filter stage, and the second filter stage has an active feedback circuit (Fig. 3 which is a feedback circuit for output 104 as shown in Fig. 6;see also separate feedback loop 105 that works in conjunction with 101 and A1 in feedback circuit as shown in overview Fig. 3z), Wherein at least two of the first amplification stage the second amplification stage the first filter stage and the second filter stage have an active feedback circuit (the claim does not preclude the circuitry from sharing a feedback circuit 105 as the first and second amplifier stages do).
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(s) 6-8 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Li in view of US 5,519,296 (hereinafter Day)
Regarding claims 6 and 7
Li teaches filters 31 and 32 in a physical hard-wired arrangement and thus fails to teach that they are programmable.
Programmable filters are known in the art such as from Day (Fig. 5a and description).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify Li such that the disclosed filter stages are programmable filter stages as this is nothing more than a simple substitution of known filter arrangements (i.e. passive for programmable) which have yielded only the predictable result of filtering the power signal of Li and would also have the predictable advantage of allowing the designer a more flexible circuitry arrangement.
Regarding claim 8
The modified Li further teaches wherein the active feedback circuit comprises an integrator (the arrangement of A2 with respect to A1 and capacitor C1 is understood to be an integrator circuit).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 21 and 23-34 are allowed. Claims 3 and 4 are objected to but would be allowable if rewritten to include the limitations of all claims from which they depend. The reasons for indicating allowable subject matter are generally those found in Applicant’s Remarks filed 01/14/2026.
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 WOODY A LEE JR whose telephone number is (571)272-1051. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 0800-1630.
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, Edward "Ned" Landrum can be reached at 571-272-5567. 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.
/WOODY A LEE JR/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3761