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 .
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 08/27/2025. The submission is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
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 3-13 & 18-21 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.
In Claim 3, the recitation of “respective values of the inductor and capacitor are configured to provide a resonant frequency of the series-connected inductor and capacitor that is based on a frequency of instability provided by the LNA in the absence of the stability compensation network” is not clear because as to how respective values of the inductor and capacitor would be configure to provide a resonant frequency of the series-connected inductor and capacitor that is based on a frequency of instability provided by the LNA in the absence of the stability compensation network.
Is there another set of values for the inductor and capacitor when the stability compensation network is activated? since the stability compensation network can be turn “on” or “off”. It appears that same values of inductor and capacitor being set either activated or de-activated the stability compensation network. Further clarification is needed.
In Claim 3, the recitation of “the absence of the stability compensation network” which lacks of antecedent basis. Further clarification is needed.
Claims 4-13 are rejected due to their dependency.
In Claim 18, the recitation of “the source” which lacks of antecedent basis.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claims 19-21 are rejected due to their dependency.
For the purpose of the examining, the examiner reads claim 3 as
“respective values of the inductor and capacitor are configured to provide a resonant frequency of the series-connected inductor and capacitor that is based on a frequency of instability provided by the LNA in de-activated of the stability compensation network” and Claim 18, read as ---a source---.
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.
Claims 1-2 & 14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Gorbachov (US 2012/0280754 A1).
Regarding claim 1:
Gorbachov discloses in Fig. 15 (para [0063], which states ,a bipolar type or a field effect type, and can utilize any semiconductor architecture such as Metal Oxide Semiconductor Field Effect “MOSFET”, Metal Semiconductor Field Effect “MESFET”) a low noise amplifier (LNA), comprising:
an input transistor (Fig. 15 show bipolar transistor Q which can be as transistor FET as states in para [0063]); and
a degeneration network (circuit 98c) having a first terminal ( top terminal or RL7) connected to a source (emitter of transistor Q, i.e. source) of the input transistor and a second terminal (bottom terminal of L1) connected to a reference ground (ground), the degeneration network (circuit 98c) comprising: a degeneration inductor (L1) connected between the first terminal and the second terminal; and
a stability compensation network (form by element RC3 (include resistor R and C3) and inductor L2) connected between the first terminal and the second terminal, the stability compensation network comprising a resistor (R), an inductor (L2), and a capacitor (C3) in series connection.
Regarding claim 2:
Gorbachov discloses in Fig. 15, wherein: the stability compensation network (RC3 and L2) is configured to provide unconditional stability of the LNA (no specific condition being disclosed).
Regarding claim 14:
Gorbachov discloses in Fig. 15, further comprising:
one or more additional stability compensation networks (RC4 that include resistor and capacitor; and inductor L3) respectively connected between the first terminal and the second terminal, each of the one or more stability compensation networks comprising a respective additional resistor, inductor, and capacitor in series connection (as seen from Fig. 15).
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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claims 3-13 & 15-17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Gorbachov in view of Youssef et al. (US 20140240048 A1, hereinafter, Youssef).
Regarding claim 3:
Gorbachov discloses the limitations as applied in claim 1 except for a switch connected between a terminal (terminal between inductor 522 and source of transistor 534) stability compensation network (e.g., inductor 524).
Youssef discloses in Fig. 5A, an amplifier circuit having a degeneration inductor and an inductor (524) being connected in series with a transistor 526, which function as a switch).
Therefore, 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 circuit of Gorbachov to include a transistor 524 (i.e., switch) in order to provide the benefits of the desired source degeneration inductance (para 0029) and also improve linearity of the LNA (para. 00650 and provide good performance (para. 0068).
As an obvious consequence above, the combination further discloses respective values (no specific values being define by the applicant, hence broadly) of the inductor and capacitor are configured to provide a resonant frequency of the series-connected inductor and capacitor that is based on a frequency of instability provided by the LNA in the absence (deactivated by transistor or switch 526 of Fig. 5A) of the stability compensation network.
Regarding claims 4-7, 9 & 11-13:
Gorbachov discloses the limitations as applied in claim 1 except for wherein: the resonant frequency is equal to, or greater, than the frequency of instability (claim 4); and/or the frequency of instability is greater than ten times an in-band frequency of operation of the LNA, and the resonant frequency is substantially equal to the frequency of instability (claim 5); and/or: the frequency of instability is smaller than ten times an in-band frequency of operation of the LNA, and the resonant frequency is greater than the frequency of instability (claim 6); and/or the resonant frequency is about twenty percent greater than the frequency of instability (claim 7); and/or the respective values of the inductor and capacitor are further configured to provide an impedance of the series-connected inductor and capacitor that is equal to, or greater than, ten times an impedance of the degeneration inductor, LDEG, at the in-band frequency of operation of the LNA (claim 9); and/or wherein: the respective values of the inductor and capacitor, in combination with a respective value of the resistor, are configured to provide a magnitude of a µ-factor calculated from an equivalent two-port scattering parameters of the LNA to be strictly greater than one for the provision of unconditional stability of the LNA (claim 11); and/or the respective values of the inductor, capacitor, and resistor, are derived from an iterative process that optimizes: the magnitude of the µ-factor for provision of the unconditional stability, and an in-band RF performance of the LNA, including a noise figure and an input reflection factor (claim 12); and/or the iterative process includes an initial set of the respective values that include: an initial value of the inductor that is in a range from one tenth to one twentieth of a value of the degeneration inductor, and an initial value of the capacitor that in combination with initial value of the inductor provides a resonant frequency of the series-connected inductor and capacitor that is equal to ten times an in-band frequency of operation of the LNA (claim 13).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to characterize or setting or chosen the resonant frequency is equal to, or greater, than the frequency of instability (claim 4); and/or the frequency of instability is greater than ten times an in-band frequency of operation of the LNA, and the resonant frequency is substantially equal to the frequency of instability (claim 5); and/or: the frequency of instability is smaller than ten times an in-band frequency of operation of the LNA, and the resonant frequency is greater than the frequency of instability (claim 6); and/or the resonant frequency is about twenty percent greater than the frequency of instability (claim 7); and/or the respective values of the inductor and capacitor are further configured to provide an impedance of the series-connected inductor and capacitor that is equal to, or greater than, ten times an impedance of the degeneration inductor, LDEG, at the in-band frequency of operation of the LNA (claim 9); and/or wherein: the respective values of the inductor and capacitor, in combination with a respective value of the resistor, are configured to provide a magnitude of a µ-factor calculated from an equivalent two-port scattering parameters of the LNA to be strictly greater than one for the provision of unconditional stability of the LNA (claim 11); and/or the respective values of the inductor, capacitor, and resistor, are derived from an iterative process that optimizes: the magnitude of the µ-factor for provision of the unconditional stability, and an in-band RF performance of the LNA, including a noise figure and an input reflection factor (claim 12); and/or the iterative process includes an initial set of the respective values that include: an initial value of the inductor that is in a range from one tenth to one twentieth of a value of the degeneration inductor, and an initial value of the capacitor that in combination with initial value of the inductor provides a resonant frequency of the series-connected inductor and capacitor that is equal to ten times an in-band frequency of operation of the LNA (claim 13) ( it is note that analogous as discussed in claim 3) since it has been held that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or workable ranges involves only routine skill in the art In re Aller, 105 USPQ 233.
Regarding claims 8 & 10:
Gorbachov discloses the limitations as applied in claim 1 except for the resonant frequency is in range from minus twenty percent to plus twenty percent the frequency of instability; and/or wherein: the respective value of the inductor is in a range from one tenth to one twentieth of a value of the degeneration inductor.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to characterize or setting or chosen the resonant frequency is in range from minus twenty percent to plus twenty percent the frequency of instability; and/or wherein: the respective value of the inductor is in a range from one tenth to one twentieth of a value of the degeneration inductor, since it has been held that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or workable ranges involves only routine skill in the art In re Aller, 105 USPQ 233.
Regarding claim 15:
Gorbachov discloses the limitations as applied in claim 14 except for a switch connected between inductor of the stability compensation network.
Youssef discloses in Fig. 5A, an amplifier circuit having a degeneration inductor and an inductor (524) being connected in series with a transistor 526, which function as a switch).
Therefore, 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 circuit of Gorbachov to include a transistor 524 (i.e., switch) in order to provide the benefits of the desired source degeneration inductance (para 0029) and also improve linearity of the LNA (para. 00650 and provide good performance (para. 0068).
Accordingly, the combination (Gorbachov in view of Youssef) discloses further comprising at least one switch (transistors 526 of in series connection between: the first terminal, and the stability compensation network or one of the one or more additional stability compensation networks.
Regarding claim 16:
Gorbachov discloses in Fig. 15, the limitations as applied in claim 14 except for an output cascode transistor in series connection with the input transistor.
Youssef discloses in Fig. 5A, an amplifier circuit having a cascode transistor (536) being connected to an input transistor 534)
Therefore, 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 circuit of Gorbachov to include a cascode transistor (534) in order to provide better performance with gate-level splitting may include better gain, lower noise figure, improved linearity, better isolation to reduce coupling of leaked LO signals for downconverters, etc. (para. 0062).
Regarding claim 17:
The combination (Gorbachov in view of Youssef) further discloses wherein: the output cascode transistor (536 of fig. 5A) is coupled to a supply voltage (V9 of Fig. 15) through a load inductor (RL2 of Fig. 15).
Claims 18-21 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Gorbachov.
Insofar regarding claim 18 is understood:
Gorbachov discloses in Fig. 15 (para [0063], which states ,a bipolar type or a field effect type, and can utilize any semiconductor architecture such as Metal Oxide Semiconductor Field Effect “MOSFET”, Metal Semiconductor Field Effect “MESFET”) a method for providing unconditional stability to an inductively degenerated common source low noise amplifier (LNA), the method comprising:
determining a frequency of instability of the LNA (it note that no specific frequency defined by the applicant, thus broadly, any frequency of instability of the amplifier); and
coupling a stability compensation network (RC3 includes resistor, capacitor, and L2 of Fig. 15) to [[the]] a source of an input transistor (transistor Q, as mention above, hereinafter called FET transistor) of the LNA, wherein the stability compensation network comprises a resistor (resistor R, an inductor (L2), and a capacitor C or C3) in series connection except for respective values of the inductor and capacitor are configured to provide a resonant frequency of the series-connected inductor and capacitor that is based on the frequency of instability of the LNA (it is noted that Gorbachov discloses analogous art, where inductor, capacitor and resistor are in series and parallel with degeneration inductor as shown in Fig. 15).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to set respective values of the inductor and capacitor are configured to provide a resonant frequency of the series-connected inductor and capacitor that is based on the frequency of instability of the LNA, since it has been held that discovering an optimum value of a result effective variable involves only routine skill in the art. In re Boesch, 617 F.2d 272, 205 USPQ 215 (CCPA 1980).
Regarding claim 19:
Gorbachov discloses the limitations as applied in claim 18 except for the resonant frequency is in range from minus twenty percent to plus twenty percent the frequency of instability.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to characterize or setting or chosen the resonant frequency is in range from minus twenty percent to plus twenty percent the frequency of instability (it is noted that Gorbachov discloses analogous art, where inductor, capacitor and resistor are in series and parallel with degeneration inductor as shown in Fig. 15), since it has been held that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or workable ranges involves only routine skill in the art In re Aller, 105 USPQ 233.
Regarding claim 20:
Gorbachov discloses the limitations as applied in claim 18 except for the respective values of the inductor and capacitor, in combination with a respective value of the resistor, are configured to provide a magnitude of a µ-factor calculated from an equivalent two-port scattering parameters of the LNA to be strictly greater than one for the provision of the unconditional stability.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to characterize or setting or chosen the respective values of the inductor and capacitor, in combination with a respective value of the resistor, are configured to provide a magnitude of a µ-factor calculated from an equivalent two-port scattering parameters of the LNA to be strictly greater than one for the provision of the unconditional stability (it is noted that Gorbachov discloses analogous art, where inductor, capacitor and resistor are in series and parallel with degeneration inductor as shown in Fig. 15, since it has been held that discovering an optimum value of a result effective variable involves only routine skill in the art. In re Boesch, 617 F.2d 272, 205 USPQ 215 (CCPA 1980).
Regarding claim 21:
Gorbachov discloses in Fig. 15, a degeneration inductor (L2) connected to the source of the input transistor (e.g. emitter of Q2, i.e., source) except for respective values of the inductor, capacitor, and resistor, from an iterative process that optimizes: the magnitude of the µ-factor for provision of the unconditional stability, and an in-band RF performance of the LNA, including a noise figure and an input reflection factor, wherein iterative process includes an initial set of the respective values that include: an initial value of the inductor that is in a range from one tenth to one twentieth of a value of a degeneration inductor connected to the source of the input transistor, and an initial value of the capacitor that in combination with initial value of the inductor provides a resonant frequency of the series-connected inductor and capacitor that is equal to ten times an in-band frequency of operation of the LNA.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to characterize or setting or chosen the respective values of the inductor, capacitor, and resistor, from an iterative process that optimizes: the magnitude of the µ-factor for provision of the unconditional stability, and an in-band RF performance of the LNA, including a noise figure and an input reflection factor, wherein iterative process includes an initial set of the respective values that include: an initial value of the inductor that is in a range from one tenth to one twentieth of a value of a degeneration inductor connected to the source of the input transistor, and an initial value of the capacitor that in combination with initial value of the inductor provides a resonant frequency of the series-connected inductor and capacitor that is equal to ten times an in-band frequency of operation of the LNA, since it has been held that discovering an optimum value of a result effective variable involves only routine skill in the art. In re Boesch, 617 F.2d 272, 205 USPQ 215 (CCPA 1980).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to KHIEM D NGUYEN whose telephone number is (571)270-3941. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri 8:00 AM-5:00 PM EST.
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, Jessica Han can be reached at (571) 272-2078. 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.
/KHIEM D NGUYEN/Examiner, Art Unit 2843
Prosecution Insights