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 .
This office action is a response to an application filed 07/11/2023, in which claims 1-20 are pending and ready for examination.
Information Disclosure Statement
The Examiner has considered the references listed on the Information Disclosure Statement submitted on 10/09/2023.
Examiner Notes
Examiner cites particular columns and line numbers in the references as applied to the claims below for the convenience of the applicant. Although the specified citations are representative of the teachings in the art and are applied to the specific limitations within the individual claim, other passages and figures may apply as well. It is respectfully requested that, in preparing responses, the applicant fully consider the references in entirety as potentially teaching all or part of the claimed invention, as well as the context of the passage as taught by the prior art or disclosed by the examiner.
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.
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 1-6, 9, 11-14, 16, and 18-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US Patent Publication No. 2023/0133288 to Park et al. (hereinafter Park), in view of US Patent Publication No. 2013/0113449 to Pietri et al., (hereinafter Pietri)
Regarding claim 1, Park teaches an apparatus comprising: a first conductor connected to a pin of a controller (A first conductor such as 910A connected to a pin pad of a controller, see Fig. 18, p110-112, p103, p5-p6, p26, p23, p28, Park), the first conductor comprising a first signal comprising a first signal component (A first element such as 910A, can be used for signal and/or power signal and events, see p5-6, abs. Fig. 18, p110-112, p103, p5-p6, p26, p23, p28, Park); a second conductor comprising a second signal, the second signal comprising a second signal component (A second conductor such as 920A where the element, through which a signal such as current or voltage is transmitted, see p112, p5, p65, Fig. 18, p110-112, p103, p5-p6, p26, p23, p28, Park); and a coupling section comprising a portion of the first conductor situated in proximity to a portion of the second conductor, wherein the second signal component of the second signal on the second conductor induces an induced signal on the first conductor within the coupling section, wherein the induced signal comprises the second signal component (A first conductor such as 910A, comprises inductive element that provides inductive coupling to which a signal from a second element 920A induces a signal such as current/volage signal, see p112, Fig. 18, p110-112, p103, p5-p6, p26, p23, p28, Park); the controller comprising: a first signal monitor configured to monitor the first signal present on the pin of the controller and to report a status of the first signal (Event monitor of signal for reporting an event such as damage or overcurrent, see p111, Fig. 18, p110-112, p103, p5-p6, p26, p23, p28, Park); and a second signal monitor configured to monitor the second signal by monitoring the induced signal present on the pin and to report a status of the second signal based on the induced signal (Additional monitors sensing for monitoring on a second signal line element, see Fig. 3, p109-p112, Fig. 18, p110-112, p103, p5-p6, p26, p23, p28, Park).
Park does not explicitly teach a lower frequency and higher frequency signal, wherein a higher frequency signal component that is at least an order of magnitude higher than the lower frequency signal component.
However, Pietri from the same or similar field of monitoring of controller based devices and power supply, teaches a lower frequency and higher frequency signal, wherein the higher frequency signal component that is at least an order of magnitude higher than the lower frequency signal component (A lower DC signal and an AC signal, thus a lower and higher frequency signal with at east an order of magnitude difference, see p14, p28, Pietri).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the filing date of the claimed invention to modify the device and signal monitoring as described by Park and incorporating lower and higher frequency signals, as taught by Pietri
One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to do this modification in order to better monitor and test a desired property of a device under test (see p14, p28, Pietri).
Regarding claim 2, the combination of Park and Pietri teaches all the limitations of the base claim as outlined above, and are analyzed as previously discussed with regard to that claim.
Pietri further teaches wherein the first conductor monitors a direct current ("DC") signal (Testing with a DC voltage, see p14, Pietri) and wherein the controller comprises an analog-to-digital converter connected to the pin of the controller configured to provide a digitized version of an analog signal present at the pin to the first signal monitor (Analog to digital converter for capture, see p48, Pietri), wherein the first signal monitor monitors a DC level of the first conductor (Test with capture and for determining to maintaining voltage at a conductor pin at a voltage, see p19,14, Pietri).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the filing date of the claimed invention to modify the device and signal monitoring as described by the combination that includes Park and incorporating direct current and analog to digital converter, as taught by Pietri
One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to do this modification in order to better monitor and test a desired property of a device under test and to digitize a captured signal so as to better condition a signal for further processing by a digital computing system (see p14,p48, 31, p28, Pietri).
Regarding claim 3, the combination of Park and Pietri teaches all the limitations of the base claim as outlined above, and are analyzed as previously discussed with regard to that claim.
Pietri further teaches wherein the second signal of the second conductor comprises a digital signal (Digital signal, see pp14, 27, Pietri) and wherein the controller comprises an analog-to-digital converter connected to the pin of the controller configured to provide a digitized version of an analog signal at the pin to the second signal monitor (Analog to digital converter for capture for a second signal, see p48, Pietri) and wherein the second signal monitor monitors a frequency of the induced signal matching a frequency of the digital signal (Frequency signal captured for evaluation, see p38-41, p48, Pietri).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the filing date of the claimed invention to modify the device and signal monitoring as described by the combination that includes Park and incorporating analog to digital converter and digital signal, and frequency monitoring, as taught by Pietri
One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to do this modification in order to better monitor and test a desired property of a device under test and to digitize a captured signal so as to better condition a signal for further processing by a digital computing system (see p14,p48, 31, p28, Pietri).
Regarding claim 4, the combination of Park and Pietri teaches all the limitations of the base claim as outlined above, and are analyzed as previously discussed with regard to that claim.
Pietri further teaches wherein a second signal monitor utilizes one of a Fast Fourier Transform and a digital filter (Fast Fourier transform used, digital filter, see P39-40, 48, 21, Pietri).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the filing date of the claimed invention to modify the device and signal monitoring as described by the combination that includes Park and incorporating FFT, as taught by Pietri
One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to do this modification in order to better extract desired information such as phase and magnitude information and for error compensation by a filter (see p14, p48, 31, p28, Pietri).
Regarding claim 5, the combination of Park and Pietri teaches all the limitations of the base claim as outlined above, and are analyzed as previously discussed with regard to that claim.
Park further teaches wherein the second signal monitor monitors: an amplitude of the induced signal; and/or presence and non-presence of the induced signal (Magnitude of induced signal is evaluated, see p70,82, Park).
Regarding claim 6, the combination of Park and Pietri teaches all the limitations of the base claim as outlined above, and are analyzed as previously discussed with regard to that claim.
Park further teaches wherein the coupling section comprises a portion of the first conductor and a portion of the second conductor configured as traces on a printed circuit board ("PCB") situated in close proximity to induce the high frequency signal component of the second conductor onto the first conductor (Printed circuit board with inducing component, see p5, Figs. 17, 18; Park).
Regarding claim 9, the combination of Park and Pietri teaches all the limitations of the base claim as outlined above, and are analyzed as previously discussed with regard to that claim.
Pietri further teaches further comprising a low pass filter configured to filter a first conductor, wherein a coupling section is positioned between the low pass filter and a pin of a controller (Removing high frequency, thus a low pass filter for passing frequencies of a lower type, and can be positioned between point of a controller and coupling, see p27, Fig. 2, Pietri).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the filing date of the claimed invention to modify the device and signal monitoring as described by the combination that includes Park and incorporating a low pass filter, as taught by Pietri
One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to do this modification in order to better permit only desired frequencies of interest to be obtained by removing unwanted noise (see p27, Fig. 2, Pietri).
Regarding claim 11, the combination of Park and Pietri teaches all the limitations of the base claim as outlined above, and are analyzed as previously discussed with regard to that claim.
Park further teaches a first alert module configured to report a status of the first signal and/or an anomaly associated with the first signal (Event monitor of signal for reporting an anomalous event such as damage or overcurrent for mitigation, see p46-47, p111, Fig. 18, p110-112, p103, p5-p6, p26, p23, p28, Park), and further comprising a second alert module configured to report a status of the second signal and/or an anomaly associated with the second signal based on the second signal monitor monitoring the induced signal (Additional monitor sensing for monitoring on a second signal line element, see Fig. 3, p109-p112, Fig. 18, p110-112, p103, p5-p6, p26, p23, p28, Park)..
Claim 12 is rejected on the same grounds as claims 1 and 2.
Claim 13 is rejected on the same grounds as claim 2.
Claim 14 is rejected on the same grounds as claims 4 and 5.
Claim 16 is rejected on the same grounds as claim 9.
Claim 18 is rejected on the same grounds as claim 18.
Claim 19 Park teaches a computing device comprising: a processor (Circuit for operation processing, see P25, Park); a memory coupled to the processor (Memory for storage and used by operation processing , see P25, Park); a power supply (Power supply, see P6, p24, Park); a first conductor connected to the power supply and to a pin of a controller (A first element such as 910A, can be used for power signal connection and connected to controller, see p5-6, abs. Fig. 18, p110-112, p103, p5-p6, p26, p23, p28, Park)
Claim 19 is further rejected on the same grounds as claim 1.
Claim 20 is rejected on the same grounds as claims 9 and 11.
Claims 7, 8, and 15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Park, in view of Pietri, and in further view of US Patent Publication No. 2020/0107779 to Yang, (hereinafter Yang).
Regarding claim 7, the combination of Park and Pietri teaches all the limitations of the base claim as outlined above, and are analyzed as previously discussed with regard to that claim.
Park further teaches wherein a coupling section comprises a portion of a first conductor (A part of a first conductor such as 910A forms part of a coupling by way of induction, see Fig. 18, p110-112, p103, p5-p6, p26, p23, p28, Park) and a portion of a second conductor (A part of a second conductor such as 920A forms part of a coupling by way of induction, see p112, p5, p65, Fig. 18, p110-112, p103, p5-p6, p26, p23, p28, Park), wherein the portion of the first conductor and the portion of the second conductor are in close proximity to induce a signal component of the second conductor onto the first conductor (Conductors are in proximity so as to induce a signal such as current/volage signal, see p112, Fig. 18, p110-112, p103, p5-p6, p26, p23, p28, Park).
Pietri further teaches a higher frequency signal (An AC signal, thus a higher frequency signal, see p14, p28, Pietri).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the filing date of the claimed invention to modify the device and signal monitoring as described by Park and incorporating lower and higher frequency signals, as taught by Pietri
One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to do this modification in order to better monitor and test a desired property of a device under test (see p14, p28, Pietri).
Park does not explicitly teach a conductor configured as a cable, wherein conductors are unshielded.
However, Yang from the same or similar field of inductive transmission, teaches a conductor configured as a cable, wherein conductors are unshielded (An inductive coupling can be made with a conductor as a wire, where the wires are bare, thus unshielded, see p236, Yang).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the filing date of the claimed invention to modify the device and signal monitoring as described by the combination that includes Park and incorporating a cable and unshielded conductors, as taught by Yang.
One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to do this modification in order to better use a desired conductive material and which will not block, by shielding or insulation, electromagnetic waves when induced transmission is desired (see p236, Yang).
Regarding claim 8, the combination of Park and Pietri teaches all the limitations of the base claim as outlined above, and are analyzed as previously discussed with regard to that claim.
Park further teaches wherein a coupling section comprises a first conductor (A first conductor such as 910A forms part of a coupling by way of induction, see Fig. 18, p110-112, p103, p5-p6, p26, p23, p28, Park) and to a second conductor at a coupling section (A second conductor such as 920A forms part of a coupling by way of induction, see p112, p5, p65, Fig. 18, p110-112, p103, p5-p6, p26, p23, p28, Park), wherein the coupling capacitor is sized and situated to induce the signal component of the second conductor onto the first conductor.
Pietri further teaches a higher frequency signal (An AC signal, thus a higher frequency signal, see p14, p28, Pietri).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the filing date of the claimed invention to modify the device and signal monitoring as described by Park and incorporating lower and higher frequency signals, as taught by Pietri
One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to do this modification in order to better monitor and test a desired property of a device under test (see p14, p28, Pietri).
Park does not explicitly teach a coupling capacitor, wherein the coupling capacitor is sized and situated to induce a signal component of conductors.
However, Yang from the same or similar field of inductive transmission, teaches a coupling capacitor, wherein the coupling capacitor is sized and situated to induce a signal component signal component of conductors (A coupling capacitor between wire conductors for signal transmission, thud sized and situated for said purpose, see p241, Yang).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the filing date of the claimed invention to modify the device and signal monitoring as described by the combination that includes Park and incorporating a coupling capacitor, as taught by Yang.
One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to do this modification in order to transmit a desired signal between conductors by substituting a known transmission means equivalent (see p241, Yang).
Claim 15 is rejected on the same grounds as claims 6, 7. and 8.
Claims 10 and 17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Park, in view of Pietri, and in further view of US Patent Publication No. 2020/0195160 to Mayell et al., (hereinafter Mayell).
Regarding claim 10, the combination of Park and Pietri teaches all the limitations of the base claim as outlined above, and are analyzed as previously discussed with regard to that claim.
Park further teaches wherein a coupling section is configured to create a coupling between a first conductor and a second conductor detectable by a signal monitor(Conductors are in proximity so as to induce a signal coupling that can be used for event monitoring detection, see p112, Fig. 18, p110-112, p103, p5-p6, p26, p23, p28, Park).
Park does not explicitly teach a coupling coefficient sufficient such that an induced signal has a maximum amplitude and signal transmission is smaller than a maximum amplitude of the signal.
However, Mayell from the same or similar field of electromagnetic coupling, teaches a coupling coefficient sufficient such that an induced signal has a maximum amplitude and signal transmission is smaller than a maximum amplitude of the signal (A coupling coefficient sets the magnitude of waveform signal, and used in transmission, thus limiting amplitude up for transmission uo to a magnitude , see p103, clm 56, p102-103, 89, 70, Mayell).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the filing date of the claimed invention to modify the device and signal monitoring as described by the combination that includes Park and incorporating a coupling coefficient, as taught by Mayell.
One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to do this modification in order to better scale a signal to a desired magnitude (see p103, clm 56, p102-103, 89, 70, Mayell).
Claim 17 is rejected on the same grounds as claim 10.
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Otremba et al., US. Patent Publication No. 2014/0103902 teaches a semiconductor chip where signals are superimposed on a lead to reduce the number of leads required.
Kuroda et al., US. Patent Publication No. 2008/0258744 teaches electric circuit testing using inductive coupling that does not require a physical test pad.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to EMILIO J SAAVEDRA whose telephone number is (571)270-5617. The examiner can normally be reached M-F: 9:30am-5:30pm (EST).
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, Robert E Fennema can be reached at (571) 272-2748. 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.
/EMILIO J SAAVEDRA/Primary Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2117
Prosecution Insights