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 .
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, see Pg. 10, Para. 2, filed 12/10/2025, applicant recites “Beyond this, there is no description in Chen of any part of a MOSFET being connected to a NPN transistor, let alone a teaching of "a collector of the first NPN transistor ... coupled to a gate of the first MOSFET and a gate of the second MOSFET," as recited in claim 1.”, with respect to claim 1 have been fully considered and are persuasive. The rejections of claims 1-20 have been withdrawn.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
Claim 1 recites the limitation "a first MOSFET, and a second MOSFET" in line 12. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. It is understood that the first MOSFET and the second MOSFET are “wherein the first switch unit comprises a first MOSFET, and the second switch unit comprises a second MOSFET” as recited in claim 5.
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.
Claim(s) 1 & 10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Telefus et al., US 20200365346 (hereinafter referred to as Telefus).
In regards to claim 1, Telefus teaches a protection unit (circuit breaker; [Abstract]), comprising: a first terminal (line hot 111; [Fig. 16]); a second terminal (line neutral 112; [Fig. 16]); a first switch unit (first switch 1604; [Fig. 16]) disposed between the first terminal and an output terminal (load hot 121; [Fig. 16]) of the protection unit (implicit; [Fig. 16]); a second switch unit (second switch 1606; [Fig. 16]) disposed between the second terminal and a ground (load neutral 122; [Fig. 16]) of the protection unit (implicit; [Fig. 16]); and a positive over voltage protection unit (protection circuit 712 & switch control circuitry 1608; [Fig. 7A, 7B, & 16]) coupled to the first terminal, the first switch unit, and the second switch unit (implicit, the protection circuit 712 is coupled to the gate of the first switch unit and to the first terminal through nodes N1 & N2; and the switch control circuitry is tied to the gates of the first switch unit and the second switch unit; [Fig. 7B & 16]) (Examiner’s Note: The protection circuit would be a substitution of the switch control circuitry 1608 in order to have a known circuit for overvoltage protection. The embodiment of figure 16 is designed to have over current and over voltage protection as taught in [0225]), and configured to switch off (fast disconnect; [0152]) the first switch unit and the second switch unit when a positive voltage (implicit that the hot voltage would be higher than the neutral line; [0074], [0152], & [Fig. 16]) at the first terminal exceeds a positive threshold (pre-set value; [0153]), the positive over voltage protection unit including a first PNP transistor (bipolar transistor 721; [Fig. 7B]) and a first NPN transistor (bipolar transistor 720; [Fig. 7B]), a first MOSFET (first MOSFET switch 601 in first switch 1604; [Fig. 7A & 16]), and a second MOSFET (first MOSFET switch 601 in second switch 1606; [Fig. 7A & 16]), wherein a collector of the first NPN transistor is coupled to a gate of the first MOSFET and a gate of the second MOSFET (implicit, the collector of transistor 720 is coupled to the VGS control line through resistor 730. The VGS control line is directly tied to the gate of the MOSFETs 601 & 602; [Fig. 7B]).
In regards to claim 10, most of the claim limitations have been taught above in claim 1. In addition, Denning further teaches the unit further comprises: a current limiting unit (sense resistor 716 and transistors 720 & 722; [0157] & [Fig. 7B]) at the first terminal (implicit that the circuitry is coupled to the first terminal through the nodes N1 & N2; [Fig. 7A & 7B]).
Claim(s) 2 & 11-13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Telefus et al., US 20200365346 (hereinafter referred to as Telefus) in view of Denning et al., US Patent 11860599 (hereinafter referred to as Denning).
In regards to claim 2, Telefus does not teach the unit further comprising: a negative over voltage protection unit coupled to the first terminal, the second terminal, the first switch unit, and the second switch unit, and configured to switch off the first switch unit and the second switch unit when a negative voltage at the first terminal exceeds a negative threshold.
Denning teaches the unit further comprising: a negative over voltage protection unit (undervoltage protection unit) coupled to the first terminal, the second terminal, the first switch unit, and the second switch unit, and configured to switch off (switches 286 may be opened) the first switch unit and the second switch unit when a negative voltage at the first terminal exceeds a negative threshold (threshold value of undervoltage) ([Col. 21, Ln. 59-61]). (Examiner’s Note: A negative overvoltage protection unit checks for when a voltage goes under a certain value. Therefore, under broadest reasonable interpretation, an undervoltage protection is a type of negative overvoltage protection.)
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to have modified Telefus in order to incorporate the unit further comprising: a negative over voltage protection unit coupled to the first terminal, the second terminal, the first switch unit, and the second switch unit, and configured to switch off the first switch unit and the second switch unit when a negative voltage at the first terminal exceeds a negative threshold as taught by Denning. The motivation for doing so would be able to provide negative voltage protection because of an AC input as part of the fault conditions, over-voltage condition as taught by Telefus in [0074].
In regards to claim 11, Telefus does not teach an ADC module, comprising: a protection unit according to claim 1; and an ADC IC coupled to the output terminal and the ground and configured to convert an analog signal between the first terminal and the second terminal into a digital signal.
Denning teaches an ADC module (IO submodule 100), comprising: a protection unit (OR IO 144A & 144B) according to claim 1; and an ADC IC (ADC IC in selected IO module) coupled to the output terminal and the ground ([Col. 1, Ln. 7-11]) and configured to convert an analog signal (analog) between the first terminal and the second terminal into a digital signal (digital) ([Col. 10, Ln. 58-62]. (Examiner’s Note: One skilled in the art would know, for IO modules, they have an ADC IC inside because the specification will list the card having “ADC resolution”. An example IO module with this feature is the PXIe-4310.)
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to have modified Telefus in order to incorporate an ADC module, comprising: a protection unit according to claim 1; and an ADC IC coupled to the output terminal and the ground and configured to convert an analog signal between the first terminal and the second terminal into a digital signal as taught by Denning. The motivation for doing so would be to apply known hardware to the processor 1602 as taught by Denning in Fig. 16.
In regards to claim 12, Telefus does not teach a system, comprising: a measurement module comprising at least one ADC module according to claim 1, the measurement module being configured to measure analog signals in Explosion Hazardous Areas; a controller coupled to the measurement module and configured to issue control signals based on measured analog signals; and a communication interface coupled to the controller and configured to provide a communicate path for the controller and other devices in the system.
Denning teaches a system ([Fig. 3]), comprising: a measurement module (IO module 76) comprising at least one ADC module (IO submodule 100) according to claim 1, the measurement module being configured to measure analog signals (analog IO) in Explosion Hazardous Areas (hazardous materials by chemical regulatory agencies) ([Col. 10, Ln. 31-35, 58-67]); a controller (backplanes 78) coupled to the measurement module and configured to issue control signals (analog and/or digital signals) based on measured analog signals ([Col. 11, Ln. 56-63]); and a communication interface (network adapter 80) coupled to the controller and configured to provide a communicate path for the controller and other devices in the system ([Col. 10, Ln. 7-10]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to have modified Telefus in order to incorporate a system, comprising: a measurement module comprising at least one ADC module according to claim 1, the measurement module being configured to measure analog signals in Explosion Hazardous Areas; a controller coupled to the measurement module and configured to issue control signals based on measured analog signals; and a communication interface coupled to the controller and configured to provide a communicate path for the controller and other devices in the system as taught by Denning. The motivation for doing so would be to apply a known circuitry for communication between the measurement modules and the main circuit.
In regards to claim 13, Telefus does not teach the protection unit further comprising: a negative over voltage protection unit coupled to the first terminal, the second terminal, the first switch unit, and the second switch unit, and configured to switch off the first switch unit and the second switch unit when a negative voltage at the first terminal exceeds a negative threshold.
Denning teaches wherein the protection unit further comprises: a negative over voltage protection unit (undervoltage protection unit) coupled to the first terminal, the second terminal, the first switch unit, and the second switch unit, and configured to switch off (switches 286 may be opened) the first switch unit and the second switch unit when a negative voltage at the first terminal exceeds a negative threshold (threshold value of undervoltage) ([Col. 21, Ln. 59-61]). (Examiner’s Note: A negative overvoltage protection unit checks for when a voltage goes under a certain value. Therefore, under broadest reasonable interpretation, an undervoltage protection is a type of negative overvoltage protection.)
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to have modified Telefus in order to incorporate the protection unit further comprising: a negative over voltage protection unit coupled to the first terminal, the second terminal, the first switch unit, and the second switch unit, and configured to switch off the first switch unit and the second switch unit when a negative voltage at the first terminal exceeds a negative threshold as taught by Denning. The motivation for doing so would be able to provide negative voltage protection because of an AC input as part of the fault conditions, over-voltage condition as taught by Telefus in [0074].
Claim(s) 3 & 14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Telefus et al., US 20200365346 (hereinafter referred to as Telefus) in view of Denning et al., US Patent 11860599 (hereinafter referred to as Denning) and in further view of Skarda et al., US Patent 5463261 (hereinafter referred to as Skarda).
In regards to claim 3, Denning & Chen do not teach the protection unit further comprising: a hot swap unit coupled to the first switch unit and the second switch unit, and configured to switch off the first switch unit and the second switch unit when the protection unit is hot-inserted into or hot-removed from a board card.
Skarda teaches the unit further comprising: a hot swap unit (circuit 78) coupled to the first switch unit and the second switch unit ([Col. 7, Ln. 67-Col. 8, Ln. 4] & [Fig. 7]), and configured to switch off the first switch unit and the second switch unit when the protection unit is hot-inserted into or hot-removed (peripheral device plug engages the socket) from a board card (peripheral device) ([Col. 9, Ln. 45-52], [Col. 3, Ln. 12-15], & [Col. 10, Ln. 9-13]).
Therefore, given the teachings as a whole, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Telefus & Denning to incorporate the protection unit further comprising: a hot swap unit coupled to the first switch unit and the second switch unit, and configured to switch off the first switch unit and the second switch unit when the protection unit is hot-inserted into or hot-removed from a board card as taught by Skarda. The circuit 78 would couple to the gate of the first and second switch unit at the Vcard connection 84. The motivation for doing so would be to add a device that is capable of conserving power when a module is not attached as taught by Skarda ([Col. 2, Ln. 48-51]).
In regards to claim 14, Denning & Chen do not teach the protection unit further comprising: a hot swap unit coupled to the first switch unit and the second switch unit, and configured to switch off the first switch unit and the second switch unit when the protection unit is hot-inserted into or hot-removed from a board card.
Skarda teaches the ADC module according to claim 13, wherein the protection unit further comprises: a hot swap unit (circuit 78) coupled to the first switch unit and the second switch unit ([Col. 7, Ln. 67-Col. 8, Ln. 4] & [Fig. 7]), and configured to switch off the first switch unit and the second switch unit when the protection unit is hot-inserted into or hot-removed (peripheral device plug engages the socket) from a board card (peripheral device) ([Col. 9, Ln. 45-52], [Col. 3, Ln. 12-15], & [Col. 10, Ln. 9-13]).
Therefore, given the teachings as a whole, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Telefus & Denning to incorporate the protection unit further comprising: a hot swap unit coupled to the first switch unit and the second switch unit, and configured to switch off the first switch unit and the second switch unit when the protection unit is hot-inserted into or hot-removed from a board card as taught by Skarda. The circuit 78 would couple to the gate of the first and second switch unit at the Vcard connection 84. The motivation for doing so would be to add a device that is capable of conserving power when a module is not attached as taught by Skarda ([Col. 2, Ln. 48-51]).
Claim(s) 4-5 & 15-16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Telefus et al., US 20200365346 (hereinafter referred to as Telefus) in view of Denning et al., US Patent 11860599 (hereinafter referred to as Denning) and in further view of Skarda et al., US Patent 5463261 (hereinafter referred to as Skarda), and in further view of Stockinger et al., US Patent 12034000 (hereinafter referred to as Stockinger)
In regards to claim 4, Telefus, Denning, & Skarda do not teach the unit further comprising an Electronic Static Discharge (ESD) circuit arranged at the output terminal and comprising a first diode and a second diode connected in series between the ground and a first power supply.
Stockinger teaches the unit further comprising an Electronic Static Discharge (ESD) circuit (primary ESD circuit 112) arranged at the output terminal and comprising a first diode (diode A11) and a second diode (diode B11) connected in series between the ground (VSSA 104) and a first power supply (VDDA 102) ([Col. 2, Ln. 31-35 & Ln. 61-66]).
Therefore, given the teachings as a whole, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Telefus, Denning, & Skarda to incorporate the unit further comprising an Electronic Static Discharge (ESD) circuit arranged at the output terminal and comprising a first diode and a second diode connected in series between the ground and a first power supply as taught by Stockinger. The motivation for doing so would be to satisfy the ESD protection requirement by consumer electronic standards.
In regards to claim 5, Telefus further teaches wherein the first switch unit comprises a first MOSFET (first MOSFET switch 601 in first switch 1604; [Fig. 7A & 16]), and the second switch unit comprises a second MOSFET (first MOSFET switch 601 in second switch 1606; [Fig. 7A & 16]), wherein the first MOSFET comprises a source coupled to the output terminal (implicit; [Fig. 16]), a gate coupled to the positive over voltage protection unit (implicit; [Fig. 7A & 7B]), and a drain coupled to the first terminal through a first resistor (current sensor 1630; [Fig. 16]) (Examiner’s Note: because the current sensor is installed in series one skilled in the art would know there is a resistor internal to the sensor.), and wherein the second MOSFET comprises a source coupled to the ground (implicit; [Fig. 16]), a gate coupled to the positive over voltage protection unit (implicit; [Fig. 7A & 7B]), and a drain coupled to the second terminal (implicit; [Fig. 16]).
In regards to claim 15, Telefus, Denning, & Skarda do not teach the unit further comprising an Electronic Static Discharge (ESD) circuit arranged at the output terminal and comprising a first diode and a second diode connected in series between the ground and a first power supply.
Stockinger teaches wherein the protection unit further comprises an Electronic Static Discharge (ESD) circuit (primary ESD circuit 112) arranged at the output terminal and comprising a first diode (diode A11) and a second diode (diode B11) connected in series between the ground (VSSA 104) and a first power supply (VDDA 102) ([Col. 2, Ln. 31-35 & Ln. 61-66]).
Therefore, given the teachings as a whole, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Telefus, Denning, & Skarda to incorporate the unit further comprising an Electronic Static Discharge (ESD) circuit arranged at the output terminal and comprising a first diode and a second diode connected in series between the ground and a first power supply as taught by Stockinger. The motivation for doing so would be to satisfy the ESD protection requirement by consumer electronic standards.
In regards to claim 16, Telefus further teaches wherein the first switch unit comprises a first MOSFET (first MOSFET switch 601 in first switch 1604; [Fig. 7A & 16]), and the second switch unit comprises a second MOSFET (first MOSFET switch 601 in second switch 1606; [Fig. 7A & 16]), wherein the first MOSFET comprises a source coupled to the output terminal (implicit; [Fig. 16]), a gate coupled to the positive over voltage protection unit (implicit; [Fig. 7A & 7B]), and a drain coupled to the first terminal through a first resistor (current sensor 1630; [Fig. 16]) (Examiner’s Note: because the current sensor is installed in series one skilled in the art would know there is a resistor internal to the sensor.), and wherein the second MOSFET comprises a source coupled to the ground (implicit; [Fig. 16]), a gate coupled to the positive over voltage protection unit (implicit; [Fig. 7A & 7B]), and a drain coupled to the second terminal (implicit; [Fig. 16]).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 6-9 and 17-20 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
In regards with claim 6, in combination with other limitations of the claim, the prior art fails to suggest “wherein the positive over voltage protection unit comprises a third diode, a second resistor, and a third resistor, wherein an anode of the third diode is coupled to a point between the first resistor and the first terminal, a cathode of the third diode is coupled to a first terminal of the second resistor and a first terminal of the third resistor, a second terminal of the second resistor is coupled to an emitter of the first PNP transistor, a second terminal of the third resistor is coupled to a base of the first PNP transistor and the first power supply, a collector of the first PNP transistor is coupled to a base of the first NPN transistor, a collector of the first NPN transistor is coupled to the gate of the first MOSFET and the gate of the second MOSFET, an emitter of the first NPN transistor is coupled to the ground.” The prior arts teach of an overvoltage protection unit, but does not teach the exact circuitry used and the specifications of similar commercially available IO modules does not share the full schematic used within the module.
The claims 7-9 are allowable because of their dependency on claim 6.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
In regards with claim 17, in combination with other limitations of the claim, the prior art fails to suggest “wherein the positive over voltage protection unit comprises a third diode, a first PNP transistor, a first NPN transistor, a second resistor, and a third resistor, wherein an anode of the third diode is coupled to a point between the first resistor and the first terminal, a cathode of the third diode is coupled to a first terminal of the second resistor and a first terminal of the third resistor, a second terminal of the second resistor is coupled to an emitter of the first PNP transistor, a second terminal of the third resistor is coupled to a base of the first PNP transistor and the first power supply, a collector of the first PNP transistor is coupled to a base of the first NPN transistor, a collector of the first NPN transistor is coupled to the gate of the first MOSFET and the gate of the second MOSFET, an emitter of the first NPN transistor is coupled to the ground.” The prior arts teach of an overvoltage protection unit, but does not teach the exact circuitry used and the specifications of similar commercially available IO modules does not share the full schematic used within the module.
The claims 18-20 are allowable because of their dependency on claim 17.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SAMANTHA L FAUBERT whose telephone number is (703)756-1311. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 8AM - 5PM.
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, Crystal Hammond can be reached at 5712701682. 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.
SAMANTHA LYNETTE FAUBERT
Examiner
Art Unit 2836
/CRYSTAL L HAMMOND/Supervisory Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2838