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 .
Election/Restrictions
Claims 12-20 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected invention, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Election was made without traverse in the reply filed on 11/3/2025.
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. Therefore, the second latch circuit coupled to the first latch circuit and a third latch circuit coupled to the second latch circuit, digital devices of the second and third latch circuits integrated circuit must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s).
Still regarding the drawing objections not showing every feature: Claim 1 recites “a multi-stage comparator including a pre-amplifier configured to receive an analog input signal and convert the analog input signal into a first analog output signal and a second analog output signal; the multi-stage comparator also includes a first latch circuit with a first receiving device that receives the first analog
PNG
media_image1.png
555
762
media_image1.png
Greyscale
output signal, a second receiving device that receives the second analog output signal”. Figure 2 is replicated with the associated figure numbers labeled for reference and illustration. As is seen in figure 2, the analog input signal is 206 which is fed to the preamp 204, the preamp then outputs signals 211a and 211B. As is depicted in figure 2 the multi-stage comparator includes the preamp 204, and the latch circuit 208. The latch circuit 208 appears to have two components which are unlabeled in figure 2. Both signals 211a and 211b, which are exiting the preamp 204, are then fed into the first latch circuit component. It is assumed that the claimed first receiving device is the first component in the latch circuit and the second receiving device is the second component. As the claim is written the first receiving device receives the first analog output from the preamplifier and the second receiving device receives the second analog output from the amplifier. This is not what is illustrated in the drawing or the specification (see paragraph 0043). What is illustrated in the drawing is that the first output signal and the second output signals are both fed into the first receiving device of the latch circuit. This is not remedied by figure 3 which has the first receiving device labeled 210 and the second receiving device labeled 212, it appears as though both devices 210/212 receive the same signal. The drawings seem to directly contradict the claim language which requires a first receiving device of the latch circuit receiving a first analog signal from the preamp, and a second receiving device receives a second signal from the preamp. Therefore based on this analysis the second receiving device receiving the second analog output is not shown in the drawings.
Still regarding figure 2, there is an arrow from the second component of the latch circuit which is directed towards the timing circuit 222, this would have the latch circuit sending signals to the timing circuit. It is believed that this arrow have signals from the timing circuit to the second component of the latch circuit.
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 Interpretation
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
(f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The claims in this application are given their broadest reasonable interpretation using the plain meaning of the claim language in light of the specification as it would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art. The broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim element (also commonly referred to as a claim limitation) is limited by the description in the specification when 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is invoked.
As explained in MPEP § 2181, subsection I, claim limitations that meet the following three-prong test will be interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
(A) the claim limitation uses the term “means” or “step” or a term used as a substitute for “means” that is a generic placeholder (also called a nonce term or a non-structural term having no specific structural meaning) for performing the claimed function;
(B) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is modified by functional language, typically, but not always linked by the transition word “for” (e.g., “means for”) or another linking word or phrase, such as “configured to” or “so that”; and
(C) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is not modified by sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function.
Use of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim with functional language creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites sufficient structure, material, or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Absence of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is not to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is not interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites function without reciting sufficient structure, material or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Claim limitations in this application that use the word “means” (or “step”) are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. Conversely, claim limitations in this application that do not use the word “means” (or “step”) are not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action.
This application includes one or more claim limitations that do not use the word “means,” but are nonetheless being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, because the claim limitation(s) uses a generic placeholder that is coupled with functional language without reciting sufficient structure to perform the recited function and the generic placeholder is not preceded by a structural modifier. Such claim limitation(s) is/are:
“first receiving device that receives the first analog output signal” and “second receiving device that receives the second analog output signal” in claim 1.
Regarding the three-prong analysis the nonce term in both limitations is considered to be “device” the functional language which follows is found underlined. In this instance the nonce term of “device” is modified by functional language with no structure, material or act that can perform the claimed function. Therefore based on this analysis the claims limitations are interpreted under 35 USC 112 (f).
Because this/these claim limitation(s) is/are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, it/they is/are being interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof.
If applicant does not intend to have this/these limitation(s) interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, applicant may: (1) amend the claim limitation(s) to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph (e.g., by reciting sufficient structure to perform the claimed function); or (2) present a sufficient showing that the claim limitation(s) recite(s) sufficient structure to perform the claimed function so as to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph.
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 1-11 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.
Regarding claim 1: lines 12-16 recite “the multi-stage comparator also includes a first latch circuit with a first receiving device that receives the first analog output signal, and a second receiving device that receives the second analog output signal, and configured to convert the first analog output signal and the second analog output signal into a digital output signal.” As is discussed in the drawing rejections this language is contradictory from figure 2 which has the first output signal 211a and the second analog output signal 211b both entering the same component which is assumed to be the first receiving device. As is discussed below with respect to the 112(f) rejection, it is also unclear and indefinite as to what applicant intends the first and second receiving devices to be.
Claim 6 recites “wherein the second latch circuit and the third latch circuit each comprise digital devices”. It is unclear what applicant intends “digital devices” to be. This could be any number of components and is therefore indefinite and unclear.
Claims 2-5 and 7-11 are also rejected in that they depend from claim 1.
Regarding claim 1: the limitations “first receiving device” and “second receiving device” invokes 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. However, the written description fails to disclose the corresponding structure, material, or acts for performing the entire claimed function and to clearly link the structure, material, or acts to the function. In this case, as discussed in the drawing objections, figure 2 shows a first and second receiving device however they are unlabeled and it is not clear if this is a proper interpretation. The first receiving device is shown in figure 3 as element 210 and the second receiving device is shown as 212. However, there is no discussion as to what the components of the first and second receiving devices are our could be. They are circuit components, as shown in figure 3, however the image is small and difficult to decern as to what the actual components are or could be. The first and second receiving devices are discussed in paragraphs 0009, 0010, 0012, 0013, 0026, 0043, 0046. Paragraph 0049 states that the receiving devices can be transistor, resistor, switch, or the like however this is not clear which components would be necessary to construct the first and second receiving devices. It is therefore indefinite as to what the actual structural components for the first and second receiving devices are or could be. Stated another way the specification does not provide disclosure as to the exact structure that performs the function.
Therefore, the claim is indefinite and is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, second paragraph.
Applicant may:
(a) Amend the claim so that the claim limitation will no longer be interpreted as a limitation under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph;
(b) Amend the written description of the specification such that it expressly recites what structure, material, or acts perform the entire claimed function, without introducing any new matter (35 U.S.C. 132(a)); or
(c) Amend the written description of the specification such that it clearly links the structure, material, or acts disclosed therein to the function recited in the claim, without introducing any new matter (35 U.S.C. 132(a)).
If applicant is of the opinion that the written description of the specification already implicitly or inherently discloses the corresponding structure, material, or acts and clearly links them to the function so that one of ordinary skill in the art would recognize what structure, material, or acts perform the claimed function, applicant should clarify the record by either:
(a) Amending the written description of the specification such that it expressly recites the corresponding structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function and clearly links or associates the structure, material, or acts to the claimed function, without introducing any new matter (35 U.S.C. 132(a)); or
(b) Stating on the record what the corresponding structure, material, or acts, which are implicitly or inherently set forth in the written description of the specification, perform the claimed function. For more information, see 37 CFR 1.75(d) and MPEP §§ 608.01(o) and 2181.
All claims are rejected under 35 U.S.C § 112 and it is improper to rely on speculative assumptions regarding the meaning of a claim and then base a rejection under 35 U.S.C. 103 on these assumptions. (In re Steele 305 F.2d 859,134 USPQ 292 (CCPA 1962)). As the claims are written the multistage comparator includes a preamp and a latch circuit. The latch circuit includes two receiving devices. An analog signal is delivered to the preamp, the preamp outputs two signals; a first analog output signal and a second analog output signal. The first analog output signal is received at a first receiving device and the second analog output signal is received at a second receiving device. This is not shown in figures 2 or 3. Figure 2 shows both signals exiting the preamp entering the same device. Figure 3 shows the same signal entering both the first and second receiving devices 210/212. The claims are further confusing and indefinite in that there is not disclosure as to what applicant intends the first receiving and second receiving devices to be. Therefore it is improper to rely on speculation as to what applicant intends.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Yang et al. US 2018/0262203 discloses a comparator and successive approximation analog-to-digital converter (abstract) which includes a preamplifier 11 and a latch 12 (figure 3). The latch circuit includes first and second level shift circuits 131/132 (figure 3). However, this is not a multi-stage comparator.
Hogan et al. US 2018/0220214 discloses and ADC which receives a transducer signal and outputs a data stream. The ADC circuit 2 (figure 1) includes latch circuits 4a/4b and a preamplifier 5.
However, based on the 112 issues with the claim language and the drawings it is unclear if these circuits are equivalent circuits to applicants claimed invention.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to PAULA J. STICE whose telephone number is (303)297-4352. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 7:30am -4pm MST.
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, Carl H Layno can be reached at 571-272-4949. 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.
PAULA J. STICE
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 3796
/PAULA J STICE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3796