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 .
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) was submitted on 08/20/2025. The submissions are in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statements are being considered by the examiner.
Responses to Amendments and Arguments
The amendments filed 10/02/2025 have been entered. Claims 1, 7, 9 and 15 are amended, and Claims 6, 8, 14 and 16 are canceled. Claims 1-5, 7, 9-13, and 15 remain pending in the application.
Applicant's amendments filed 10/02/2025 with respect to the interpretation of
claims 9 and 14-16 under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph have been fully considered and are persuasive. Thus, the interpretation of claims 9 and 14-16 under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph has been withdrawn.
Applicant's amendments filed 10/02/2025 with respect to the rejection of claims 9 and 14-16 under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph and 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 112 (pre-AIA ), 2nd paragraph have been fully considered and are persuasive. Thus, the rejections of claims 9 and 14-16 under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph and 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 112 (pre-AIA ), 2nd paragraph have been withdrawn.
Applicant's argument and amendments filed 10/02/2025 with respect to
the rejection of claims 1-20 directed to a judicial exception under 35 U.S.C. 101 have been fully considered but are not persuasive. (See the detailed response presented below).
On pages 8- of Applicant’s response, Applicant alleges that (i) The present invention is a method and system for temperature slope calibration, not merely a human mental process. … calibration process directly improves the operation of the thermal sensor itself. (ii) The step of "obtaining a parameter" described in claims 1 and 9 is not merely data storage. … This single-temperature calibration is a non-conventional, non-routine technical improvement that solves the problems of high cost and long time associated with the prior art. (iii) MPEP 2106.05(a) states that: … because the claimed invention improves the functions of an electronic device.
The Examiner respectfully disagrees.
The claimed features related to calibrating the temperature slope of the thermal sensor and calculating temperature slope are a mathematical concept and/or calculation performed with a mathematical function (see paragraph 0015). Claim 1 does not present tangible or physical elements/components and/or integration of improvements to be indicative of specific features/structure/acts, for example, how and or with what to calibrate the temperature slop of the thermal sensor, where the thermal sensor is a high level of generality to be performed by a generic computer function of a generic computer component. (See MPEP 2106.04(d)). Note that the step of “obtaining a parameter” is not an abstract idea but an insignificant pre-solution activity to merely collect routine data (i.e., sensor data) to be used for perform a mathematical calculation.
Applicant’s arguments filed 10/02/2025, with respect to the rejection of claims 1-6, 8, 9-14 and 16 under 35 U.S.C. 102 have been fully considered but are not persuasive.
On page 9 of Remarks, Applicant alleges that Claim 1 has been amended to include the limitation "calculating the temperature slope of the thermal sensor by using at least the parameter of the thermal sensor and a reference value of the parameter of the thermal sensor to calibrate a reference value of the temperature slope". The applicant believes that Horng fails to explicitly teach this feature. Withdrawal of the rejections under 35 U.S.C. 102 is respectfully requested.
Examiner respectfully disagrees.
Note that, under the broadest reasonable interpretation, the added limitation is indicative of calculating the temperature slope of the thermal sensor using reference value related to temperature. Under this interpretation, at least Fig. 1A and paragraphs 0026 and 0034-0036 teaches using offset voltage at a reference temperature to calculate T curve of the temperature sensor.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 101
35 U.S.C. 101 reads as follows:
Whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter, or any new and useful improvement thereof, may obtain a patent therefor, subject to the conditions and requirements of this title.
The current 35 USC 101 analysis is based on the current guidance (Federal Register vol. 79, No. 241. pp. 74618-74633). The analysis follows several steps. Step 1 determines whether the claim belongs to a valid statutory class. Step 2A prong 1 identifies whether an abstract idea is claimed. Step 2A prong 2 determines whether any abstract idea is integrated into a practical application. If the abstract idea is integrated into a practical application the claim is patent eligible under 35 USC 101. Last, step 2B determines whether the claims contain something significantly more than the abstract idea. In most cases the existence of a practical application predicates the existence of an additional element that is significantly more.
The 35 USC 101 analysis between each element of claims and its combination is presented in the table below
Claim number and elements
Judicial exception (Step 2A Prong one)
Practical application (Step 2A Prong two)/ Significantly more (Step 2B)
Claim 1
Step 1: Yes, statutory class
Step 2A Prong two: No / Step 2B: No
An adaptive temperature slope calibration method of a thermal sensor, comprising:
Step2A Prong one: Yes
obtaining a parameter of the thermal sensor under a temperature environment;
insignificant extra-solution activities to collect sensor data which are used to perform abstract idea itself.
“thermal sensor” is high-level of generality.
calibrating a temperature slope of the thermal sensor by using the parameter of the thermal sensor obtained under the temperature environment without using parameter(s) of the thermal sensor under other temperature environment(s); and
abstract idea
mental process or mathematical concept
“calibrating …” is mathematical calculation based on the obtained data. (see para 0015).
“temperature slop” is mathematical factor/value/amount/parameter.
storing the temperature slope of the thermal sensor for subsequent use of detecting temperature;
insignificant extra-solution activity
wherein the step of calibrating the temperature slope of the thermal sensor by using the parameter of the thermal sensor obtained under the temperature environment without using the parameter(s) of the thermal sensor under the other temperature environment(s) comprises: calculating the temperature slope of the thermal sensor by using at least the parameter of the thermal sensor and a reference value of the parameter of the thermal sensor to calibrate a reference value of the temperature slope.
“calibrating the temperature slope of the thermal sensor …” is a mathematical calculation based on the obtained data. (see para 0015).
Claims 1-5, 7, 9-13, and 15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to a judicial exception (i.e., a law of nature, a natural phenomenon, or an abstract idea) without significantly more. Claims 1-5, 7, 9-13, and 15 are directed to an abstract idea. The claim(s) does/do not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception as addressed below and presented in the above table.
Step 2A: Prong One
Regarding Claim 1, the limitations recited in Claim 1, as drafted, are processes that, under its broadest reasonable interpretation, cover performance of the limitation in the mathematical calculations and/or the mind, as presented in the above table. Nothing in the claim elements precludes the step from practically being performed in the mind and/or the mathematical calculations. For example, “calibrating a temperature slope of the thermal sensor by using the parameter of the thermal sensor obtained under the temperature environment without using parameter(s) of the thermal sensor under other temperature environment(s)” and “calculating the temperature slope of the thermal sensor by using at least the parameter of the thermal sensor and a reference value of the parameter of the thermal sensor to calibrate a reference value of the temperature slope” in the context of this claim may encompass mathematical calculations by calculating or inferring the temperature slope and the reference value of the temperature slop based on the obtained parameter of the thermal sensor (i.e., gathered routine data) and a reference value of the obtained parameter. (See paragraph 0015). The limitation of “temperature slope” is indicative of mathematical factor/value/amount used in the mathematical calculation. (See paragraph 0015).
Step 2A: Prong Two
This judicial exception is abstract ideal itself and not integrated into a practical application. In particular, the specification details use of a system including the temperature slope calibration unit to perform mathematical calculations of “calibrating a temperature slope of the thermal sensor by using the parameter of the thermal sensor obtained under the temperature environment without using parameter(s) of the thermal sensor under other temperature environment(s)” “calculating the temperature slope of the thermal sensor by using at least the parameter of the thermal sensor and a reference value of the parameter of the thermal sensor to calibrate a reference value of the temperature slope”. The thermal sensor is recited at high-level of generality to merely gather routine data (i.e., parameter) of the sensor. The limitation of “obtaining a parameter of the thermal sensor under a temperature environment” is insignificant pre-solution activity necessary to merely gather routine data (the parameter of the thermal sensor) to be used for performing the abstract idea. The limitation of “storing the temperature slope of the thermal sensor for subsequent use of detecting temperature” is insignificant post-solution activity necessary to merely perform a generic computer function of a general computer component to thereby store the mathematical result. See MPEP 2106.05(g). There is no showing of integration into a practical application such as an improvement to the functioning of a computer, or to any other technology or technical field, or use of a particular machine.
Step 2B:
The claim does not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception. The limitation of “obtaining a parameter of the thermal sensor under a temperature environment” is insignificant pre-solution activity necessary to merely gather routine data (the parameter of the thermal sensor) to be used for performing the abstract idea. The limitation of “storing the temperature slope of the thermal sensor for subsequent use of detecting temperature” is insignificant post-solution activity necessary to merely perform a generic computer function of a general computer component to thereby store the mathematical result. See MPEP 2106.05(g). Therefore, the functions and/or structures related to the “thermal sensor” are well-understood, routine, conventional activities previously known to the industry, specified at a high level of generality to the judicial exception, as the Horng reference (US 20200103289 A1) teaches. See MPEP 2106.05(d). As discussed above, with respect to integration of the abstract idea into a practical application, using a system including the thermal sensor to perform “obtaining a parameter of the thermal sensor under a temperature environment”, including the temperature slope calibration unit to perform mathematical calculations of “calibrating a temperature slope of the thermal sensor by using the parameter of the thermal sensor obtained under the temperature environment without using parameter(s) of the thermal sensor under other temperature environment(s)”, “storing the temperature slope of the thermal sensor for subsequent use of detecting temperature” and “calculating the temperature slope of the thermal sensor by using at least the parameter of the thermal sensor and a reference value of the parameter of the thermal sensor to calibrate a reference value of the temperature slope” amounts to no more than mere instructions to apply the exception using a generic computer component. Mere instructions to apply an exception using a generic computer component cannot provide an inventive concept cannot provide statutory eligibility. Claim 1 is not patent eligible.
Regarding Claims 2-5 and 7, the limitations are further directed to an abstract idea, as described in claim 1. The limitation of “generating the parameter of the thermal sensor according to a base-emitter voltage of the BJT” in claim 2, “generating the parameter of the thermal sensor according to a delta base-emitter voltage of the BJT” in claim 3, “generating a frequency signal to serve as the parameter of the thermal sensor according to a base-emitter voltage of the BJT or a delta base-emitter voltage of the BJT” in claim 4, and “generating the parameter of the thermal sensor according to a current of the BJT” in claim 5 are insignificant extra-solution activities to merely gather routine data (i.e., “the parameter of the thermal sensor”) used for performing abstract idea. The limitations of “calculating the temperature slop of the thermal sensor by using a formula: …” in claim 7 in the context of this claim may encompass mathematical calculations by calculating or inferring the temperature slope based on the obtained parameter of the thermal sensor (i.e., gathered routine data). (See paragraph 0015). The additional element of the bipolar junction transistor (BJT) recited in claims 2-5 and 7 is high level of generality to merely collect the routine data of the thermal sensor. For the reasons described above with respect to Claims 1 and 2-5 and 7, the judicial exceptions are not meaningfully integrated into a practical application, or amount to significantly more than the abstract idea.
Regarding Claim 9, it is a system type claim having similar limitations as of claim 1 above. Therefore, it is rejected under the same rationale as of claim 1 above. The additional elements of the sensing circuit and the temperature slope calibration unit recited in claims 2-5 and 7 are high level of generalities to merely collect the routine data of the thermal sensor and perform a mathematical calculation.
Regarding Claims 10-13 and 15, the limitations are further directed to an abstract idea, as described in claims 2-5 and 7. For the reasons described above with respect to claims 2-5 and 7, the judicial exceptions are not meaningfully integrated into a practical application, or amount to significantly more than the abstract idea.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 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 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 1-5 and 9-13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Horng et al. (US 20200103289 A1, hereinafter referred to as “Horng”).
Regarding Claim 1, Horng teaches an adaptive temperature slope calibration method of a thermal sensor (Fig. 1; system 2), comprising:
obtaining a parameter of the thermal sensor under a temperature environment (Fig. 1A, paragraphs 0026, 0028 and 0030-0031, in particular paragraph 0026 teach obtaining a parameter related to base-emitter voltage of the thermal sensor in a temperature environment of BJTs);
calibrating a temperature slope (Fig. 1B, T curves 170, 172, 180, 182) of the thermal sensor by using the parameter of the thermal sensor obtained under the temperature environment without using parameter(s) of the thermal sensor under other temperature environment(s) (Fig 1B, Fig. 8A-13, paragraphs 0034-0036 and 0055-0056 teach calibrating temperature sensors under the temperature environment of the sensors.); and
storing the temperature slope of the thermal sensor for subsequent use of detecting temperature (Para 0037-0038 teach obtaining differential voltage detected in the temperature environment of the temperature sensor);
wherein the step of calibrating the temperature slope of the thermal sensor by using the parameter of the thermal sensor obtained under the temperature environment without using the parameter(s) of the thermal sensor under the other temperature environment(s) comprises: calculating the temperature slope of the thermal sensor by using at least the parameter of the thermal sensor and a reference value of the parameter of the thermal sensor to calibrate a reference value of the temperature slope (Note that, under the broadest reasonable interpretation, “calculating the temperature slope of the thermal sensor by using at least the parameter of the thermal sensor and a reference value of the parameter of the thermal sensor …” is indicative of calculating the temperature slope of the thermal sensor and the reference value of the calculated temperature slop, by using the parameter of the thermal sensor and a reference value of the parameter related to rature. Fig. 1A, paragraphs 0026 and 0034-0036 teaches using offset voltage at a reference temperature to calculate T curve of the temperature sensor).
Regarding Claim 2, Horng teaches wherein the thermal sensor comprises at least one bipolar junction transistor (BJT) (Fig. 1A, 110, 140), and the step of obtaining the parameter of the thermal sensor under the temperature environment comprises:
generating the parameter of the thermal sensor according to a base-emitter voltage of the BJT (Fig. 1A, paragraphs 0030-0031 teach base-emitter voltage generated from transistors 124, 134, 154, 164).
Regarding Claim 3, Horng teaches wherein the thermal sensor comprises at least one bipolar junction transistor (BJT) (Fig. 1A, 110, 140), and the step of obtaining the parameter of the thermal sensor under the temperature environment comprises:
generating the parameter of the thermal sensor according to a delta base-emitter voltage of the BJT (Fig. 1A, paragraphs 0030-0031 teach base-emitter voltage generated from transistors 124, 134, 154, 164).
Regarding Claim 4, Horng teaches wherein the thermal sensor comprises at least one bipolar junction transistor (BJT) (Fig. 1A, 110, 140), and the step of obtaining the parameter of the thermal sensor under the temperature environment comprises:
generating a frequency signal (differential voltage in para 0031) to serve as the parameter of the thermal sensor according to a base-emitter voltage of the BJT or a delta base-emitter voltage of the BJT (Fig. 1A, paragraphs 0030-0032 teach base-emitter voltage generated from transistors 124, 134, 154, 164).
Regarding Claim 5, Horng teaches wherein the thermal sensor comprises at least one bipolar junction transistor (BJT) (Fig. 1A, 110, 140), and the step of obtaining the parameter of the thermal sensor under the temperature environment comprises:
generating the parameter of the thermal sensor according to a current of the BJT (Fig. 1A, paragraphs 0029-0032 teach determining current densities at its respective emitter current density generated from a current source (122, 132, 152, 162)).
Regarding Claim 9, it is a system type claim and has similar limitations as of a part of claim 1 above. Therefore, it is rejected under the same rationale as of claim 1 above. The additional element of the sensing circuit is taught by Horng at least at a temperature sensor including two pairs of BJTs (Fig. 1A, paragraph 0026).
Regarding Claim 10, it is dependent on claim 9 and has similar limitations as of claim 2 above. Therefore, it is rejected under the same rationale as of claim 2 above.
Regarding Claim 11, it is dependent on claim 9 and has similar limitations as of claim 3 above. Therefore, it is rejected under the same rationale as of claim 3 above.
Regarding Claim 12, it is dependent on claim 9 and has similar limitations as of claim 4 above. Therefore, it is rejected under the same rationale as of claim 4 above.
Regarding Claim 13, it is dependent on claim 9 and has similar limitations as of claim 5 above. Therefore, it is rejected under the same rationale as of claim 5 above.
Citation of Pertinent Art
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Gold et al. (US 6996491 B2) teaches a system and method to operate with one or more active thermal sensors embedded in the die of an integrated circuit to provide highly accurate die temperature measurements, where the system and method are able to monitor and control the die temperature of the integrated circuit to avoid an integrated circuit malfunction due to an undesirable temperature condition.
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 BYUNG RO LEE whose telephone number is (571)272-3707. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday-Friday 8:30am-4:00pm.
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, Lee Rodak can be reached on (571) 270-5628. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-2555.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see https://ppair-my.uspto.gov/pair/PrivatePair. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/BYUNG RO LEE/Examiner, Art Unit 2858
/LEE E RODAK/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2858