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 .
Response to Amendment
The Amendment filed 12/23/2025 has been entered.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, see page 10, filed 12/23/2025, with respect to claim 1 have been fully considered and are persuasive. The prior art rejection of claim 1 has been withdrawn.
Drawings
The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. Regarding claim 3, it states that a second MOS transistor couples the drain of the first MOS transistor to the output node. It is clear from the limitations in claim 1 that the reference figure is Fig. 6, however, there is no second MOS transistor in this figure, and since claim 3 is dependent on claim 1, this creates a discrepancy. This feature must be shown or cancelled. Regarding claims 5 and 13, it states “each of the first device and the second device comprising: … a biasing circuit configured to…” however, in Fig. 6, only one biasing circuit is shown that is shared between the two devices. Claims 21 and 22 also state “each bias circuit” even though only one bias circuit is shown in Fig. 6. In the specification par. 130, it says “not illustrated but can have its own biasing circuit,” however since each individual bias circuit is being claimed, it must be shown in the drawings or cancelled. No new matter should be entered.
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
Claim Objections
Claims 2, 8, 9, and 11 are objected to because of the following informalities:
Regarding claim 2, the limitation “wherein the drain of the first MOS transistor is coupled to the output node” is already claimed in lines 6-7 of claim 1, which means claim 2 is not further narrowing claim 1.
Regarding claim 8, line 2: “series-connected with the first resistor” should read “series-connected with the second resistor.”
Regarding claim 9, line 2: “drain coupled to the second terminal of the first resistor” should read “drain coupled to the second terminal of the second resistor.”
Regarding claim 11, the limitation “wherein the second terminal of the first resistor is coupled to the first node” is already claimed in lines 4-5 of claim 1, which means claim 11 is not further narrowing claim 1.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Interpretation
Regarding claim 5, examiner wants to make clear that they understand the limitation “of the corresponding device” to mean that each device has its own output node and a first MOS transistor of each device is connected to each device’s own output node.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 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.
Claims 3, 5-7 and 13-22 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Claim 3 states that there is a second MOS transistor that coupled the drain of the first MOS transistor to the output node, however, fig. 6, which is the obvious embodiment for claim 1 which this claim depends on, does not have a second MOS transistor. It’s unclear how this connection would look in combination with everything that is stated in claim 1. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 5 states that each device has its own biasing circuit, however this is not shown in Fig. 6, which is the obvious embodiment that is being claimed, and therefore it’s a bit unclear how exactly the connection would look. Claim 13 also has this same issue. Appropriate correction is required. Claims 6-7 and 21 and claims 14-17 and 22 inherit this rejection.
Claim 13 recites the limitation "the current source" in line 7 of page 7. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. A current source was already stated earlier in the claim with reference to #600 of fig. 6. However, this current source appears to be #100 in fig. 6. Appropriate correction is required. Claims 14-17 and 22 inherit this rejection.
Claim 18 is rejected for the same reasons as claim 13. Line 12 states “the current source” but a current source was already stated earlier in claim 1 with reference to #600 of fig. 6. Appropriate correction is required. Claims 19-20 inherit this rejection.
Claims 21 and 22 recite the limitation “each bias circuit” however, there is only one bias circuit illustrated in fig. 6, which is the obvious reference figure for all of the claims, and therefore it’s a bit unclear how exactly the connections would look. Appropriate correction is required.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 1 and 12 are allowed.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: The prior art fails to teach that the bias circuit further comprises a current source series-connected with the third MOS transistor.
Claims 8 and 9 are objected to but would be allowable if rewritten to fix the issues mentioned above.
Claims 5 and 13 would be allowable if rewritten or amended to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 2nd paragraph, set forth in this Office action.
Claims 3, 6-7, and 14-22 would be allowable if rewritten to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 2nd paragraph, set forth in this Office action and to include all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
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 NAREH SHAMIRYAN whose telephone number is (703)756-4616. The examiner can normally be reached M-F: 7:00AM-4:00PM PT.
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 at (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.
/NAREH SHAMIRYAN/Examiner, Art Unit 2843
/ANDREA LINDGREN BALTZELL/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2843
Prosecution Insights