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 .
Double Patenting
The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory double patenting rejection is appropriate where the conflicting claims are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969).
A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on nonstatutory double patenting provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with the examined application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. See MPEP § 717.02 for applications subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA as explained in MPEP § 2159. See MPEP § 2146 et seq. for applications not subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b).
The filing of a terminal disclaimer by itself is not a complete reply to a nonstatutory double patenting (NSDP) rejection. A complete reply requires that the terminal disclaimer be accompanied by a reply requesting reconsideration of the prior Office action. Even where the NSDP rejection is provisional the reply must be complete. See MPEP § 804, subsection I.B.1. For a reply to a non-final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.111(a). For a reply to final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.113(c). A request for reconsideration while not provided for in 37 CFR 1.113(c) may be filed after final for consideration. See MPEP §§ 706.07(e) and 714.13.
The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The actual filing date of the application in which the form is filed determines what form (e.g., PTO/SB/25, PTO/SB/26, PTO/AIA /25, or PTO/AIA /26) should be used. A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/applying-online/eterminal-disclaimer.
Claims 1-14 and 17-20 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1, 6-9, 11, 12, and 14-16 of U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2025/0038708. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because many of the main limitations are similar to the limitations of the PG Pub.
Regarding Claim 1, Claim 1 of the PG Pub also teaches first and second windings with center taps coupled to each other. The only significant difference is the pending claim teaching wireless circuitry and the claim of the PG Pub teaching mixer circuitry.
The above also applies to claims 11 and 19 which are equally similar to claim 14 of the PG Pub.
Claim 2 is similar to claim 12 of the PG Pub.
Claims 3, 17, and 20 are similar to claim 6 of the PG Pub.
Claim 4 is similar to claim 7 of the PG Pub.
Claim 5 is similar to claim 9 of the PG Pub.
Claim 6 is similar to claim 11 of the PG Pub.
Claim 7 is similar to claim 16 of the PG Pub.
Claims 8 and 10 are similar to claim 15 of the PG Pub.
Claim 9 is similar to claim 8 of the PG Pub.
Claim 12 is similar to claim 15 of the PG Pub.
Claim 13 is similar to claim 16 of the PG Pub.
Claim 14 is taught in claim 14 of the PG Pub.
Claim 18 is similar to claim 7 of the PG Pub.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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.
Claim(s) 1, 7-17, 19, and 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102a(1) as being anticipated by Krishnamurthi (US 2019/0267945).
Referring to Claim 1, Krishnamurthi teaches wireless circuitry comprising:
a radio-frequency transmission line path (see RFp in fig. 7 which shows the bottom part of the circuitry as the RF transmission line path); and
a transformer communicably coupled to the radio-frequency transmission line path, the transformer including a first winding having a first center tap contact (see windings 232a and 234a with center tap 210a in fig. 7), a second winding magnetically coupled to the first winding and having a second center tap contact (see windings 232b and 234b with node between windings as the center tap in fig. 7), and
a conductive path that couples the first center tap contact to the second center tap contact (see fig. 7 which shows nodes 210a and the node between windings 232b and 234b connected).
Referring to Claim 11, Krishnamurthi teaches wireless circuitry comprising:
a baseband signal path (see top part of fig. 7 which shows a mixer device 200A downconverting LO signals p and m and this process is known in the art to produce baseband signals and therefore the top section 200A is the baseband signal path);
a radio-frequency transmission line path (see RFp in fig. 7 which shows the bottom part of the circuitry as the RF transmission line path);
a first winding extending from a first terminal to a second terminal, the first terminal and the second terminal being communicably coupled to the baseband signal path (see windings 232b and 234b in fig. 7 where the ends of the windings are connected to the baseband signal path since it is connected to the top part of the circuitry);
a second winding that is magnetically coupled to the first winding and that extends from a third terminal to a fourth terminal, wherein the third terminal and the fourth terminal are communicably coupled to the radio-frequency transmission line path (see windings 232a and 234a in fig. 7 where the ends of the windings are connected to the RF signal path at the bottom portion of the circuitry connected to RFp); and
a conductive path that couples a center tap contact of the first winding to a center tap contact of the second winding (see fig. 7 which shows node 210a between windings 232a and 234a and the node between windings 232b and 234b connected).
Referring to Claim 19, Krishnamurthi teaches a transformer configured to transmit a baseband signal (see top part of fig. 7 which shows a mixer device 200A downconverting LO signals p and m and this process is known in the art to produce baseband signals and therefore the top section 200A is the baseband signal path), the transformer comprising:
a first winding configured to receive the baseband signal and having a first center tap contact (see windings 232b and 234b in fig. 7 with node between windings as the center tap where the ends of the windings are connected to the baseband signal path since it is connected to the top part of the circuitry);
a second winding magnetically coupled to the first winding and having a second center tap contact (see windings 232a and 234a with center tap 210a in fig. 7 where the ends of the windings are connected to the RF signal path at the bottom portion of the circuitry connected to RFp); and
a conductive path that couples the first center tap contact to the second center tap contact (see fig. 7 which shows node 210a between windings 232a and 234a and the node between windings 232b and 234b connected).
Referring to Claim 7, Krishnamurthi also teaches the first winding extending from a first terminal to a second terminal (see windings 232a and 234a in fig. 7 where the ends of the windings are connected to the RF signal path at the bottom portion of the circuitry connected to RFp), the second winding extends from a third terminal to a fourth terminal (see windings 232b and 234b in fig. 7 where the ends of the windings are connected to the baseband signal path since it is connected to the top part of the circuitry), and the wireless circuitry further comprises: a first transistor having a first source-drain terminal coupled to the first terminal; and a second transistor having a second source-drain terminal coupled to the second terminal (see transistors 218c and 218d connected to windings 232a and 234a in fig. 7).
Referring to Claim 8, Krishnamurthi also teaches a third transistor having a third source-drain terminal coupled to the third terminal; and a fourth transistor having a fourth source-drain terminal coupled to the third terminal (see transistors 236c and 236d connected to winding 232b in fig. 7).
Referring to Claim 9, Krishnamurthi also teaches a fifth transistor having a fifth source-drain terminal coupled to the fourth terminal; and a sixth transistor having a sixth source-drain terminal coupled to the fourth terminal (see transistors 238a and 238b connected to winding 234b in fig. 7).
Claim 10 is identical to claim 8.
Referring to Claim 12, Krishnamurthi also teaches a first transistor having a first source-drain terminal coupled to the first terminal; and a second transistor having a second source-drain terminal coupled to the third terminal (see transistor 236c connected to winding 232b and transistor 218c connected to winding 232a in fig. 7).
Referring to Claim 13, Krishnamurthi also teaches a third transistor having a third source-drain terminal coupled to the second terminal; and a fourth transistor having a fourth source-drain terminal coupled to the fourth terminal (see transistor 238a connected to winding 234b and transistor 218d connected to winding 234a in fig. 7).
Referring to Claim 14, Krishnamurthi also teaches a transconductor coupled to the first terminal and the second terminal (see CAS in fig. 7 which is a similar circuit to 20 of figs. 1 and 2 which is described in paragraph 58 as a transconductor).
Referring to Claims 15 and 16, Krishnamurthi also teaches a switching quad coupled to the third terminal and fourth terminal (see 236 and 238 of fig. 7 which shows a switching quad with the same transistor structure as 51 of fig. 4 of the applicant’s drawings).
Referring to Claim 17, Krishnamurthi also teaches an impedance termination disposed on the conductive path (see Zin.total applied to connection node 210a which is described in paragraph 104 as the impedance termination).
Referring to Claim 20, Krishnamurthi also teaches a common mode impedance termination coupled to the conductive path (see Zin.total applied to connection node 210a which is described in paragraph 104 as the impedance termination and paragraph 20 which shows common impedance).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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.
Claim(s) 2-6 and 18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Krishnamurthi in view of Kalia et al. (US 11,316,476).
Referring to Claim 2, Krishnamurthi does not teach an additional conductive path that couples the conductive path to ground. Kalia teaches an additional conductive path that couples the conductive path to ground (see fig. 1B which shows 138 which branches out from path 132 and leads to ground). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to provide the teachings of Kalia to the device of Krishnamurthi in order to reduce unwanted interference and emission.
Referring to Claim 3, Krishnamurthi also teaches a first impedance termination disposed on the conductive path (see Zin.total applied to connection node 210a which is described in paragraph 104 as the impedance termination).
Referring to Claim 4, Kalia also teaches a second impedance termination disposed on the additional conductive path (see second impedance termination 139 on path 138 in fig. 1B).
Referring to Claim 5, Krishnamurthi also teaches the second winding extending from a first terminal to a second terminal (see fig. 7 where the ends of windings 234b and 232b are connected to the baseband signal path since it is connected to the top part of the circuitry), the wireless circuitry further comprising: a second impedance termination coupled to the first terminal; and a third impedance termination coupled to the second terminal (see Zin1 and Zin2 as the second and third impedance terminations leading into first and second terminals in fig. 7).
Referring to Claim 6, Krishnamurthi also teaches the first impedance termination is a common mode impedance termination (see paragraph 20 which shows common impedance), the second impedance termination and the third impedance termination being differential mode impedance terminations (see paragraph 54 which shows the differential impedance).
Referring to Claim 18, Kalia also teaches an impedance termination that coupled the conductive path to a reference potential (see impedance termination 139 of fig. 1B coupled to ground). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to provide the teachings of Kalia to the device of Krishnamurthi in order to reduce unwanted interference and emission.
Claim Objections
Applicant is advised that should claim 8 be found allowable, claim 10 will be objected to under 37 CFR 1.75 as being a substantial duplicate thereof. When two claims in an application are duplicates or else are so close in content that they both cover the same thing, despite a slight difference in wording, it is proper after allowing one claim to object to the other as being a substantial duplicate of the allowed claim. See MPEP § 608.01(m).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to EUGENE YUN whose telephone number is (571)272-7860. The examiner can normally be reached 9am-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, Wesley Kim can be reached at 5712727867. 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.
/EUGENE YUN/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2648