CTFR 18/478,850 CTFR 87416 DETAILED ACTION 07-03-aia AIA 15-10-aia The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA. 12-151 AIA 26-51 12-51 Status of claims 12-151-07 AIA 07-97 12-51-07 Claim s 1-11 allowed. Claims 12 and 13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101. Claim 15 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1). Claim 19 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103. Claims 14, 16-18 and 20 are objected to. Response to Arguments Applicant’s claims amendment of claims 8-14 and 18 overcome the 35 U.S.C. 112(b) rejection of claims 8-14 and 18 made previously. Applicant’s claims amendment of claims 12 and 15 overcome the claim objections of claims 12 and 15 made previously. Applicant’s argument with regard to the 35 U.S.C. 101 rejection of claim 12 found in last paragraph on page 8 of applicant’s remarks, which argues that the steps of measuring a voltage, the structural limitations in the claim, or the steps of providing currents has not been addressed. It is respectfully disagreed. The steps of measuring a voltage, the structural limitations in the claim, or the steps of providing currents has been addressed in Step 2a) Prong Two and Step 2b), please see detail 35 U.S.C. 101 rejection of claim 12 below for details. Applicant’s argument with regard to the 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) rejection of claim 15 found in last four paragraphs on page 9 of applicant’s remarks, which argues prior art reference Zhang does not disclose any mechanism for increasing a rate of discharging the capacitor, and the prior art reference Zhang also fails to teach the polarity of the current is responsive to the voltage across the resistor. It is respectfully disagreed. The prior art reference of Zhang teaches the charging circuit configured to determine a voltage across the resistor (e.g. fig. 5, V OUT is a voltage across resistor R LOAD which is determined and provided by charge pump control circuit 502), and to provide a current to the capacitor to increase a rate of charging or discharging of the capacitor (e.g. fig. 5, charge pump control circuit 502 provides current to capacitor C RES to increase from zero to maximum charging rate of the capacitor C RES ). Applicant’s argument with regard to the 35 U.S.C. 103 of claim 19 found in first two paragraphs on page 10 of applicant’s remarks, which argues claim 19 depends from claim 15 and should be deemed allowable for the reasons described above with respect to claim 15. It is respectfully disagreed. Because the 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) rejection of claim 15 rejection is proper, the 35 U.S.C. 103 of claim 19 is maintain as applicant argued that claim 19 depends from claim 15 and should be deemed allowable. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 101 07-04-01 AIA 07-04 35 U.S.C. 101 reads as follows: Whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter, or any new and useful improvement thereof, may obtain a patent therefor, subject to the conditions and requirements of this title. Claim 12 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to non-statutory subject matter. Regarding claim 12 : 12. A method of operating a Resistor-Capacitor circuit, comprising: measuring a voltage from a first terminal of a resistor to a second terminal of the resistor, where a first terminal of a capacitor is connected to the first terminal of the resistor; comparing the measured voltage to a threshold voltage; providing a negative current I - to the first terminal of the capacitor in response to the measured voltage being greater than the threshold voltage; comparing negative one multiplied by the measured voltage to the threshold voltage; and providing a positive current I + to the first terminal of the capacitor in response to negative one multiplied by the measured voltage being greater than the threshold voltage. Analysis Steps for claim 12 : Step 1 : Is claim 12 claim to a process, machine, manufacture or composition of matter? Yes, claim 12 recites a method which is within one of the 4 statutory categories the process, machine, manufacture or composition of matter. Step 2a) Prong One : Does claim 12 recite an abstract idea, law of nature, or natural phenomenon? Yes, claim 12 recites “comparing the measured voltage to a threshold voltage” may be performed by human mental activity; therefore, human mental activity is abstract idea. Yes, claim 12 recites “comparing negative one multiplied by the measured voltage to the threshold voltage” may be performed by human mental activity; therefore, human mental activity is abstract idea. Step 2a) Prong Two : Does claim 12 recite additional element that integrate the Judicial Exception into a Practical Application? No, claim 12 recites additional elements of “measuring a voltage from a first terminal of a resistor to a second terminal of the resistor, where a first terminal of a capacitor is connected to the first terminal of the resistor” which is a general extra-solution activity in obtaining voltage measurement data which does not integrate the Judicial Exception into a Practical Application because the additional elements do not impose any meaningful limits on practicing the abstract ideas. No, claim 12 recites additional elements of “providing a negative current I - to the first terminal of the capacitor in response to the measured voltage being greater than the threshold voltage” which is a general extra-solution activity in supplying a negative current which does not integrate the Judicial Exception into a Practical Application because the additional elements do not impose any meaningful limits on practicing the abstract ideas. No, claim 12 recites additional elements of “providing a positive current I + to the first terminal of the capacitor in response to negative one multiplied by the measured voltage being greater than the threshold voltage” which is a general extra-solution activity in supplying a positive current which does not integrate the Judicial Exception into a Practical Application because the additional elements do not impose any meaningful limits on practicing the abstract ideas. Step 2b): Does claim 12 recite additional elements that amount to significantly more than the Judicial Exception? No, when considering claim 12 as a whole, the general extra-solution activities of obtaining the voltage measurement data, providing the negative current, and providing the positive current are insignificant which does not amount to significantly more than judicial exception. Therefore, claim 12 is not eligible subject matter under 35 U.S.C. 101. Regarding claim 13 , “providing zero additional current to the first terminal of the capacitor” which is an extra post-solution activity which is insignificant as no additional current is receive to change a state of the capacitor”. PNG media_image1.png 949 690 media_image1.png Greyscale PNG media_image2.png 690 768 media_image2.png Greyscale Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102 07-06 AIA 15-10-15 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 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. 07-07-aia AIA 07-07 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 – 07-08-aia AIA (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. 07-15 AIA Claim 15 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102( a)(1 ) as being anticipated by Zhang (US 2003/0038669) . Regarding claim 15 , Zhang teaches a system (e.g. fig. 5 [0027], charge pump circuit 500 forms a circuit system having controlling circuit 504, charge pump control circuit 502 and output load circuit 508) comprising: a Resistor-Capacitor circuit (e.g. fig. 5, [0027], output load circuit 508 is a RC circuit) including a resistor (e.g. fig. 5, resistor R LOAD ) coupled to a capacitor (e.g. fig. 5, capacitor C RES ); and a charging circuit (e.g. fig. 5, [0027], charge pump control circuit 502 is a charging circuit) coupled to the resistor and to the capacitor (e.g. fig. 5, charge pump control circuit 502 coupled to resistor R LOAD and capacitor C RES ), the charging circuit configured to determine a voltage across the resistor (e.g. fig. 5, V OUT is a voltage across resistor R LOAD which is determined and provided by charge pump control circuit 502), and to provide a current to the capacitor to increase a rate of charging or discharging of the capacitor (e.g. fig. 5, charge pump control circuit 502 provides current to capacitor C RES to increase from zero to maximum charging rate of the capacitor C RES ), so that a magnitude and a polarity of the current are responsive to the voltage across the resistor (e.g. fig. 5, a magnitude and a polarity of the current provided to the capacitor C RES is responsive to V OUT that is the voltage across resistor R LOAD ) . Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103 07-06 AIA 15-10-15 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 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. 07-20-aia AIA 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 of this title, 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. 07-21-aia AIA Claim 19 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zhang (US 2003/0038669), and further in view of Freeman et al. (US 2016/0118906) . Regarding claim 19 , Zhang teaches further comprising: an integrated circuit (IC) on which the resistor is fabricated (e.g. fig. 5, [0027], charge pump circuit 500 is an integrated circuit includes controlling circuit 504, charge pump control circuit 502 and output load circuit 508 on which the resistor R LOAD is fabricated). However, Zhang is silent with regard to a printed circuit board (PCB); and the IC and the capacitor coupled to the PCB. Freeman teaches a printed circuit board (PCB) (e.g. 15A, [0140], printed circuit board 108); and an integrated circuit (IC) and a capacitor coupled to the PCB (e.g. fig. 15A, power controller integrated circuit 106 and at least one capacitor coupled to printed circuit board 108). It would produce a predictive result of coupling the charge pump circuit 500 of Zhang onto a printed circuit board (PCB) as taught by Freeman, for the purpose of putting a circuit system onto a printed circuit board (PCB) to make an actual electronic product and/or reducing interferences without external physical electrical wirings; therefore, improving signal qualities by using traces on the PCB instead of the external physical electrical wirings. 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 the invention of Zhang by applying the teaching of Freeman to have a printed circuit board (PCB); and the IC and the capacitor coupled to the PCB, for the purpose of putting a circuit system onto a printed circuit board (PCB) to make an actual electronic product and/or reducing interferences without external physical electrical wirings; therefore, improving signal qualities by using traces on the PCB instead of external physical electrical wirings . Allowable Subject Matter 12-151-07 AIA 07-97 12-51-07 Claim s 1-11 allowed. The following is an examiner’s statement of reasons for allowance: Regarding independent claim 1 , the cited and/or searched prior arts either singularly or in combination fail to teaches all the limitations of independent claim 1, in particular the claim limitation of “the second output of the transconductance amplifier coupled to the first terminal of the second current source, the first terminal and gate of the third transistor, and the gate of the fourth transistor, and the second terminal of the fourth transistor coupled to the second terminal of the second transistor and the first terminal of the resistor”; therefore, independent claim 1 is allowed, as are its dependent claims 2-7. Regarding independent claim 8 , the cited and/or searched prior arts either singularly or in combination fail to teaches all the limitations of independent claim 8, in particular the claim limitation of “a second switch including a first terminal, a second terminal, and a control terminal, the first terminal of the second switch coupled to the first terminal of the second current source, the control terminal of the second switch coupled to the output of the first comparator; and the second terminals of the first and second switches coupled to the first terminal of the resistor”; therefore, independent claim 8 is allowed, as are its dependent claims 9-11. 12-151-08 AIA 07-43 12-51-08 Claim s 14, 16-18 and 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. 12-57 AIA Prior Art of Record The prior art made of record is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Bar-on et al. (US 4,531,237) teaches “An energy-saving arrangement for a signal receiver that responds to intermittent incoming signals. The receiver is turned on periodically for short intervals so as to provide a low duty cycle during the standby intervals when there are no incoming signals. If an incoming signal is sensed during one of its "on" intervals, it remains on during the duration of the signal” (e.g. abstract, fig. 1). Conclusion 07-40 AIA Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL . See MPEP § 706.07(a). 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 HAIDONG ZHANG whose telephone number is (571)270-5815. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8:00 AM - 5:00 PM. 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, Huy Phan can be reached at (571) 272-7924. 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. /HAIDONG ZHANG/Examiner, Art Unit 2858 /HUY Q PHAN/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2858 Application/Control Number: 18/478,850 Page 2 Art Unit: 2858 Application/Control Number: 18/478,850 Page 3 Art Unit: 2858 Application/Control Number: 18/478,850 Page 4 Art Unit: 2858 Application/Control Number: 18/478,850 Page 5 Art Unit: 2858 Application/Control Number: 18/478,850 Page 6 Art Unit: 2858 Application/Control Number: 18/478,850 Page 7 Art Unit: 2858 Application/Control Number: 18/478,850 Page 8 Art Unit: 2858 Application/Control Number: 18/478,850 Page 9 Art Unit: 2858 Application/Control Number: 18/478,850 Page 10 Art Unit: 2858 Application/Control Number: 18/478,850 Page 11 Art Unit: 2858
Prosecution Insights