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 .
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.
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.
Claims 1-5, 14 and 20-22 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Schoeller (U. S. Patent 11,346,869).
As for claim 1-4, Schoeller discloses a calibration device (calibration unit 16 in Fig. 1) for measuring a radio frequency, RF, of a signal generator (20), the calibration device (16) comprising:
an input (see the RF input of calibration unit 16) configured to receive an RF signal of the RF signal generator (20), wherein the RF signal has discrete frequency lines (see col. 6, lines 3-5);
a comb generator (14) comprises local oscillator and a pulse generator to generate a comb signal (see the comb generator 14 and col. 5, lines 25-27); and
a mixer (mixer 24) configured to mix the RF signal with the comb signal, thereby obtaining an intermediate frequency, IF, signal (see the IF signal outputted from 16) that has discrete frequency lines and a smaller bandwidth than the RF signal (see col. 5, line 22—col. 6, line 52); and
wherein the comb signal has a higher bandwidth than the RF signal (see col. 5, lines 62-63);
wherein the comb signal has equidistant discrete frequency lines (see col. 6, lines 1-2); and
wherein each of the equidistant discrete frequency lines of the comb signal is different
to the discrete frequency lines of the RF signal with regard to frequency (see col. 6, lines 1-9).
Still referring to claims 1-4, Scholler does not specifically disclose that the comb generator is configured to generate a first local oscillator LO signal and a second local oscillator LO signal, to be mixed with the RF signal; wherein the second LO signal is a negative and time delayed copy of the first LO signal; and wherein a logical AND combination of the first LO signal and second LO signal results in the comb signal;
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the invention, to modify Scholler to disclose generating the comb signal easily from a first local oscillator LO signal and a second LO signal which is a negative and time delayed copy of the first LO signal, so that the combination of the first and second LO signals would result in the comb signal with higher bandwidth, to be mixed with the RF signal to ensure higher accuracy (see col. 1, lines 33-56).
As for claim 5, Schoeller discloses the calibration device according to claim 1 as discussed above.
Schoeller does not specifically disclose wherein the pulse generator and the mixer
are integrated.
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the invention, to modify Schoeller to integrate the pulse generator and the mixer, so as to reduce the overall size of the calibration device in Schoeller.
As for claim 14, Schoeller discloses the calibration device according to claim 1, further comprising a low noise amplifier (22 in Fig. 1) configured to amplify the RF signal before providing it to the mixer (24).
As for claim 20, Scholler discloses a calibration setup (setup 10 in Fig. 1) comprising the calibration device (16) according to claim 1, and the signal generator (20) configured to output the RF signal to a device under test, DUT (21).
As for claims 21 and 22, they are the method claim, or is a claim closely correlated to the rejected apparatus claim, claim 1. They are rejected for the same reason as stated above for the rejection of claim 1.
Claim 6-12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Schoeller (U. S. Patent 11,346,869) in view of Litwin et al. (U. S. Pub. 2006/0003727).
As for claim 6, Schoeller discloses the calibration device according to claim 1 as discussed above.
Schoeller does not specifically disclose wherein the mixer comprises: a first stage of transistors adapted to receive the RF signal as input; a second stage of transistors connected to the first stage and adapted to receive the second LO signal as input; and a third stage of transistors connected to the second stage and adapted to receive the first LO signal as input.
Litwin et al. discloses a conventional variant of a standard Gilbert cell mixer (see Fig. 1) comprises: a first stage of transistors (M1, M2) adapted to receive a RF signal (RF from LNA) as input; a second stage of transistors (M3, M4) connected to the first stage (M1, M2) and adapted to receive the second LO signal (LO+ ) as input; and a third stage of transistors (M5, M6) connected to the second stage (M3, M4) and adapted to receive the first LO signal (LO-) as input.
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the invention, to modify Schoeller to disclose using the conventional variant of a Gilbert cell mixer, as taught by Litwin et al., for the purpose of reducing the supply voltage requirements (see [0007] in Litwin).
As for claim 7, Schoeller in view of Litwin et al. discloses the calibration device according to claim 6, wherein: the first stage comprises a first transistor pair (M1, M2) connected to a current source; and
the first transistor pair is controlled by the RF signal (RF from LNA) and is configured to provide a
modulated current, which is modulated by the RF signal, to the second stage (see M3-M4 in Fig. 1).
As for claim 9, Schoeller discloses the calibration device according to claim 7, wherein:
the first transistor pair comprises a first transistor (M1) and a second transistor(M2), wherein
opposite phases of the RF signal are connected to control terminals of the first transistor and
the second transistor, respectively; wherein input terminals of the first transistor(M1) and the second transistor (M2) are connected to each other and to the current source; and wherein output terminals of the first transistor (M1) and the second transistor (M2) are connected to the second stage (M3, M4; or M5, M6).
As for claims 8 and 10-12, Schoeller in view of Litwin et al. discloses calibration device according to claim 7, wherein:
the second stage comprises a second transistor pair (M3) and a third transistor pair (M4), which are each connected to the first transistor pair (M1, M2) and are controlled by the second LO signal (LO+);
the third stage comprises a fourth transistor pair (M5) and a fifth transistor pair (M6), which are
connected to the second transistor pair and the third transistor pair (M3, M4), respectively, and are
controlled by the first LO signal (LO-); and
the second and third stage are configured to mix the modulated current, which is
provided by the first stage (M1, M2), with the second LO signal (LO+) and the first LO signal (LO-), thereby providing a pulse-modulated current as the IF signal to an output of the mixer.
Still referring to claims 8 and 10-12, Schoeller does not specifically disclose using a second transistor pair comprises a third transistor and a fourth transistor; a third transistor pair comprises a fifth transistor and a sixth transistor; a fourth transistor pair comprises a seventh transistor and an eighth transistor; and a fifth transistor pair comprises ninth transistor and tenth; and a sixth transistor pair comprising an eleventh transistor and twelfth transistor, and the corresponding circuit connections between the transistors.
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the invention, to further modify Schoeller in view of Litwin et al., to disclose using the second to sixth transistor pairs with the corresponding connections in an alternative embodiment of the mixer circuit, for the purpose of improving linearity and obtain higher conversion gain.
5. Claim 13 and 15-16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Schoeller (U. S. Patent 11,346,869) in view of Kuiri (U. S. Pub. 2004/0142674).
As for claim 13, Schoeller discloses calibration device according to claim 1 as discussed above.
Schoeller does not specifically disclose: a hold gate connected to the output of the mixer;
wherein the hold gate is configured to convert a current pulse of the IF signal provided
by the mixer to a voltage and to hold the voltage until the next current pulse of the IF signal is
output by the mixer, thereby outputting a modulated voltage as an integrated IF signal.
Kuiri discloses a down-conversion mixer which uses a hold gate (see capacitor C4 in Fig. 4) connected to the output of the mixer; wherein the hold gate (C4) is configured to convert a current pulse of the IF signal provided by the mixer to a voltage and to hold the voltage until the next current pulse of the IF signal is output by the mixer, thereby outputting a modulated voltage as an integrated IF signal.
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the invention, to further modify Schoeller to use a simple capacitor (C4) as the hold gate, taught by Kuiri, for easily converting the current output from the mixer into a voltage and hold the voltage before being outputted from the mixer.
As for claims 15 and 16, Schoeller in view of Kuiri discloses the calibration device, wherein the hold gate comprises a capacitor (C4) connected to the output of the mixer and a supply voltage (Vsupply).
Schoeller in view of Kuiri does not specifically disclose: a first frequency divider configured to receive a first clock signal, to convert the first clock signal into a second clock signal, and to provide the second clock signal to the pulse generator to generate the first LO signal and the second LO signal based on the second clock signal.
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the invention, to further modify Schoeller in view of Kuiri to use a conventional frequency divider and clock signal to generate the first LO signal, and the second LO signal which is the opposite and delay copy of the first LO signal to obtain the desired comb signal to be mixed with the RF signal.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 17-19 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.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
Claims 17-19 are allowable because none of the prior art discloses or fairly suggests: a second frequency divider; wherein the second frequency divider is configured to convert the second clock signal
into a third clock signal; and wherein the calibration device is further configured to add the third clock signal to the IF signal provided by the mixer or to the integrated IF signal provided by the hold gate, thereby obtaining a modified IF signal.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to AMY HE whose telephone number is (571)272-2230. The examiner can normally be reached 9:00am--5:00pm.
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.
/AMY HE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2858
Prosecution Insights