DETAILED ACTION
Status of the Claims
In the communication dated September 8 and October 23, 2025, claims 1-17 are pending.
In view of the Appeal Brief filed on September 8 and October 23, 2025, PROSECUTION IS HEREBY REOPENED. A new ground of rejection is set forth below.
To avoid abandonment of the application, appellant must exercise one of the following two options:
(1) file a reply under 37 CFR 1.111 (if this Office action is non-final) or a reply under 37 CFR 1.113 (if this Office action is final); or,
(2) initiate a new appeal by filing a notice of appeal under 37 CFR 41.31 followed by an appeal brief under 37 CFR 41.37. The previously paid notice of appeal fee and appeal brief fee can be applied to the new appeal. If, however, the appeal fees set forth in 37 CFR 41.20 have been increased since they were previously paid, then appellant must pay the difference between the increased fees and the amount previously paid.
A Supervisory Patent Examiner (SPE) has approved of reopening prosecution by signing below:
/DREW A DUNN/ Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2859
Response to Arguments
Appellant’s arguments with respect to at least claim 1 in the appeal filed October 23, 2025 have been considered. The argument regarding “a switch coupled to the switching converter” was persuasive but the arguments are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
In light of the new reference of Hwang US20020140407A1 finality is withdrawn and prosecution is reopened.
Terminal Disclaimer
The terminal disclaimer filed on June 9, 2025 disclaiming the terminal portion of any patent granted on this application which would extend beyond the expiration date of US Pat No. 11916426 has been reviewed and is accepted. The terminal disclaimer has been recorded.
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.
Claims 1 and 10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hwang US20020140407A1.
Regarding claim 1, A system (FIG. 3) comprising:
Hwang discloses a switching converter (106); and
a circuit coupled to the switching converter, the circuit comprising:
monitoring circuitry (Rsense/Visense/Vosense - ¶18) ;
a switch (FIG. 3 and 7 at SW3 in FIG. 7; ¶45) coupled to the switching converter (FIG. 3 illustrates the circuit illustrated in FIG. 7 as being connected to the switching converter 106 – illustrated below).
PNG
media_image1.png
361
768
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Hwang discloses a transconductance stage (¶19 – amplifier 112 is an operational transconductance amplifier) having a transconductance input and a transconductance output (FIG. 3), the transconductance input coupled to the monitoring circuitry (FIG. 3 – Visense connected to input of amplifier 112; ¶20) and the transconductance output coupled to the switch (SW3).
Hwang discloses a resistor (R1) having a first resistor terminal and a second resistor terminal (each end of the resistor), the first resistor terminal coupled to the output (output from 112) and to the switch (SW3 in FIG. 7).
Hwang discloses a capacitor (C3) coupled between the second resistor terminal (from R1) and a ground (¶19-20 –virtual ground by amplifier 112).
Although Hwang does not explicitly teach that the ground is a terminal, one of ordinary skill in the art would know that a node at the terminal of the capacitor C3 acts as a ground terminal as this is the point that the capacitor is connected to the amplifier 112.
Regarding claim 10, Hwang discloses a circuit (FIG. 3).
Hwang discloses an input voltage terminal (from 102);
Hwang discloses a load terminal (at 108);
Hwang discloses monitoring circuitry (Rsense/Visense/Vosense - ¶18) coupled to the load terminal (FIG. 3 the sensors are coupled to the load 108);
Hwang discloses a switch (FIG. 3 and 7 at SW3 in FIG. 7; ¶45 – illustrated below) coupled to the input voltage terminal (from 102) and to the load terminal (FIG. 3 – load 108 – a terminal of SW3 is connected to both the load and the input).
PNG
media_image1.png
361
768
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Hwang discloses a transconductance stage (¶19 – amplifier 112 is an operational transconductance amplifier) having a transconductance input and a transconductance output (FIG. 3), the input coupled to the monitoring circuitry (FIG. 3 – Visense connected to input of amplifier 112; ¶20) and the transconductance output coupled to the switch (SW3).
Hwang discloses a resistor (R1) having a first resistor terminal and a second resistor terminal (each end of the resistor), the first resistor terminal coupled to the transconductance output (output from 112) and to the switch (SW3 in FIG. 7).
Hwang discloses a capacitor (C3) coupled between the second resistor terminal (from R1) and a ground (¶19-20 –virtual ground by amplifier 112).
Although a battery as the load is not explicitly taught by Hwang, because the load is disclosed as being an energy storage element, a person of ordinary skill in the art would know that a battery is an energy storage element.
Although Hwang does not explicitly teach that the ground is a terminal, one of ordinary skill in the art would know that a node at the terminal of the capacitor C3 acts as a ground terminal as this is the point that the capacitor is connected to the amplifier 112.
Claims 5-6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hwang US20020140407A1 in view of Liao US20190280346A1.
Regarding claim 5, as best understood from the applicant’s specification, 1S refers to a 1 cell series configuration. For a Li-Ion battery scenario, 1S would correspond to a 4.2V cell (applicant’s specification ¶47). Thus, a 1S tripler topology is interpreted to refer to a single battery system.
Hwang discloses the circuit comprises a power stage comprising the switch (SW3), wherein the power stage has a 1S tripler topology that includes the switch (SW3) and at least one additional switch (144), and the transconductance stage (112), the resistor (R1), and the capacitor (C3) configured to provide a control signal to adjust a conductivity of the switch (SW3) and the at least one additional switch (SW1/2) (¶30 – error signal adjusts that resistance of resistor Rmul which controls the switching of SW3).
Hwang does not explicitly disclose the control signal is responsive to a detected transient fault condition.
Liao discloses the control signal is responsive to a detected transient fault condition (¶28 - the control circuit monitors the power and uses the switches to prevent damage to the back-end device).
It would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to disconnect the battery in response to a fault in order to prevent damage to the device to be charged (Liao; ¶28).
Regarding claim 6, Hwang discloses the circuit comprises a power stage comprising the switch (SW3) and at least one additional switch (144), and the transconductance stage (112), the resistor (R1), and the capacitor (C3) configured to provide a control signal to adjust a conductivity of the switch (SW3) and the at least one additional switch (144) (¶30 – error signal adjusts that resistance of resistor Rmul which controls the switching of SW3).
Hwang does not explicitly disclose the control signal is responsive to a detected transient fault condition.
Liao discloses the control signal is responsive to a detected transient fault condition (¶28 - the control circuit monitors the power and uses the switches to prevent damage to the back-end device).
It would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to disconnect the battery in response to a fault in order to prevent damage to the device to be charged (Liao; ¶28).
Claims 7-8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hwang US20020140407A1 and further in view of Schroeder et al. US20140293667A1.
Regarding claim 7, Hwang discloses the transconductance stage, the resistor and the capacitor that are used to provide control to the switch, as discussed in claim 1.
Although Hwang discloses a controller includes the transconductance stage, the resistor, and the capacitor are configured to decrease a conductivity of at least the switch (¶30 – error signal adjusts that resistance of resistor Rmul which controls the switching of SW3), Hwang does not explicitly teach during a flying capacitor charge commutation responsive to a detected overvoltage or overcurrent transient fault condition.
Schroeder discloses a controller (148) configured to decrease a conductivity of at least the switch during a flying capacitor (28) charge/discharge commutation responsive to a detected overvoltage or overcurrent transient fault condition (FIGS. 4-5; ¶27). From table 1, at least one switch is switched off which decease a conductivity of the power switch (¶21).
It would be obvious to one of ordinary skill to include the flying capacitor of Schroeder to the power switch of Hwang in order to provide voltage balancing that prevents overcharging which can damage a system (Schroeder; ¶1).
Regarding claim 8, Although Hwang discloses a controller includes the transconductance stage, the resistor, and the capacitor are configured to decrease a conductivity of at least the switch (¶30 – error signal adjusts that resistance of resistor Rmul which controls the switching of SW3), Hwang does not explicitly teach during a flying capacitor discharge commutation responsive to a detected overvoltage or overcurrent transient fault condition.
Schroeder discloses a control to decrease a conductivity of the switch (¶21 - from Table 1, at least one switch is switched off which decreases a conductivity of the power switch) during a flying capacitor (28) discharge commutation responsive to a detected overvoltage or overcurrent transient fault condition (a controller 148 selects a switching state responsive to a sensed overcharge - ¶27).
It would be obvious to one of ordinary skill to include the flying capacitor of Schroeder to the power switch of Hwang in order to provide voltage balancing that prevents overcharging which can damage a system (Schroeder; ¶1).
Claim 9 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hwang US20020140407A1 as evidenced by Jones “USB Type-C and USB Power deliver – no assembly required” October 4, 2018.
Regarding claim 9, Hwang does not explicitly disclose the load being adapted to a universal serial bus (USB) power delivery adaptor.
However, it is well-known in the art that a portable device may use a USB power delivery adapter as evidenced by Jones, where a notebook is powered using a USB power delivery (FIG. 2). Indeed, Jones begins by stating that USB power delivery is gaining momentum in products.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 2-4 and 11-14 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 and overcome the double patenting rejection.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
Regarding claim 2, although the prior art discloses the features of claim 1, the prior art does not explicitly teach the combination of “the monitoring circuitry comprises a voltage sense circuit configured to provide a battery voltage sense signal, and wherein the transconductance stage is configured to compare the battery voltage sense signal to a voltage reference value” with the amended language of claim 1.
Regarding claim 11, although the prior art discloses the features of claim 10, the prior art does not explicitly teach the combination of “the monitoring circuitry comprises a voltage sense circuit coupled to the positive battery terminal and to a negative battery terminal, the transconductance stage configured to compare a battery voltage sense signal from the voltage sense circuit with a voltage reference value” with the amended language of claim 10.
Claims 15-17 are allowed.
The following is an examiner’s statement of reasons for allowance:
Regarding claim 15, although the prior art discloses a circuit comprising a first battery terminal, as second battery terminal, a voltage sense circuit, a current sense circuit, a power stage having a first and second transconductance stage, a resistor and a capacitor coupled between the second resistor terminal and a ground terminal, the prior art does not explicitly disclose the combination of “a voltage sense circuit having first voltage sense input, a second voltage sense input, and a voltage sense output, the first voltage sense output coupled to the first battery terminal, the second voltage sense input coupled to the second battery terminal”, “the transconductance input coupled to the voltage sense output” and “a capacitor coupled between the second resistor terminal and a ground terminal”.
Claims 3-4, 12-14 and 16-17 are allowable at least by virtue of their dependence from an allowable claim.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to PAMELA JEPPSON whose telephone number is (571)272-4094. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 7:30 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, Drew Dunn can be reached on 571-272-2312. 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.
/PAMELA J JEPPSON/Examiner, Art Unit 2859
/DREW A DUNN/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2859