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 .
Priority
Foreign priority is not claimed for this application.
Drawings
The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. Therefore, the number of parallel switch paths must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). No new matter should be entered.
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
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 1-20 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.
Regarding claim 1, the number of parallel switch paths are not shown in the figures. Examiner is unsure if the different paths are the different unit charge pumps in figure 3 or if the different paths are inside each unit charge pump. Claims 14 and 18 have this same issue. All of the dependent claims inherit this rejection. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 4 recites the limitation "the amplifier" in lines 3-4. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Earlier in the claim “an amplifier input signal” was defined, however, this is for the input signal that goes into an amplifier. “The amplifier” itself does not have any antecedent basis. Appropriate correction is required.
Regarding claim 12, line 3 says “provide the first OR second voltage” however, in claim 1 lines 3-4, it says “provide a first voltage AND a second voltage.” This inconsistency makes the claim unclear and indefinite. Are both voltages being provided or is just one of them being provided? Appropriate correction is required.
Regarding claim 15, examiner is unsure if “the voltage” in line 3 is the same as “a voltage” of line 2 or if this is referring to “a first voltage or a second voltage” from claim 14. Appropriate correction is required in order to clear up this issue.
Regarding claim 16, “a number of the plurality of parallel switch paths” was already defined in claim 14. This should be changed to “the number of
Regarding claim 18, lines 6-7 say “provide a first voltage OR a second voltage” however, in lines 11-12, it says “using the first voltage AND the second voltage.” This inconsistency makes the claim unclear and indefinite. Are both voltages being provided/used or is just one of them being provided/used? Appropriate correction is required. Claims 19-20 inherit this rejection.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 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.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 1, 8, 11, 14, and 16-17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)91) and (a)(2) as being anticipated by US 20110115563 by Lesso et al.
Regarding claim 1, Lesso teaches a charge pump circuit (Fig. 5a, 18), comprising:
an input node (N10) configured to receive a supply voltage (VDD);
an output node configured to alternately provide a first voltage and a second voltage (Vout+, Vout-);
a plurality of parallel switch paths (Fig. 5b shows multiple switching paths in parallel) between the input node and the output node; and
a flying capacitor (Cf) coupled in parallel to the parallel switch paths to provide the first or the second voltages based on a control signal (Par. 134; 420 receives a control signal to operate the switch paths),
wherein a number of the parallel switch paths are configured to be activated and operated at a switching frequency in response to the control signal (CS1-CS6).
Regarding claim 8, Lesso teaches the charge pump circuit of Claim 1, further comprising a controller (Fig. 5a,b 420) having a control signal input port to receive the control signal at the control input, the controller configured to set the number of the parallel switch paths that are active and to set the switching frequency of the active parallel switch paths in response to the control signal (420 sends out signals CS1-CS6 to control the switches).
Regarding claim 11, Lesso teaches the charge pump of Claim 1, wherein the output node is configured to be coupled to a power amplifier to provide the first or the second voltage to the power amplifier (Par. 126).
Regarding claim 14, Lesso teaches a method (Fig. 5a,18), comprising:
receiving a supply voltage (VDD) at an input node (N10) of a charge pump (400);
receiving a control signal at the charge pump (controller 420 controls the switches);
activating a number of a plurality of parallel switch paths (Fig. 5b shows multiple switching paths in parallel) of the charge pump (400) as active switch paths in response to the control signal; and
operating the active switch paths at a switching frequency in response to the control signal (420 receives a control signal and operates the switch paths using CS1-CS6) to generate a first voltage or a second voltage (Vout+, Vout-) at an output node of the charge pump.
Regarding claim 16, Lesso teaches the method of claim 14, wherein activating a number of the plurality of parallel switch paths comprises selecting the number using the control signal (Fig. 5a,b 420 receives the control signal and operates the switch paths using CS1-CS6).
Regarding claim 17, Lesso teaches the method of Claim 16, wherein selecting the number comprises applying the control signal to a table of numbers (Par. 169-170, Table 1).
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) 3 and 7 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 20110115563 by Lesso et al.
Regarding claim 3, Lesso teaches the charge pump circuit of Claim 1, wherein the control signal comprises a control word having multiple bits (Par. 134 mentions that the controller 420 may be software implemented, and it is of course well known that software implementations use bits (US 20100073208 by Karthaus et al. talks about 8 bit control signals in par. 54)).
Regarding claim 7, Lesso teaches the charge pump circuit of claim 3, wherein the control word contains multiple bits and the value of the bits determines the number of the parallel switch paths to be activated and the switching frequency (Par. 134, controller 420 can be software implemented (well known in the art that software uses bits) and it sends out control signals CS1-CS6 in order to control the parallel switch paths).
Claim(s) 5 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 20110115563 by Lesso et al. in view of US 8008975 by Allen et al.
Regarding claim 5, Lesso teaches the charge pump circuit of claim 3, but fails to teach that the control word comprises a class H code.
However, Allen teaches an amplifier system with a charge pump that is controlled with a class-H controller. A person of ordinary skill in the art would be able to implement the controller of Lesso with a class H code in order to increase the efficiency of the amplifier (Col. 1 lines 31-34).
Claim(s) 18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 7830209 by Woodford et al.
Regarding claim 18, Woodford teaches an audio system (Fig. 1) comprising:
audio logic (14) configured to generate a control signal and an analog audio signal (Col. 3 lines 59-65; output of #14 to #12 through A2 and output of #14 to A1 through #16) in response to a digital audio signal (digital audio);
a charge pump circuit (10) coupled to the audio logic (#14 through #12) and to a supply voltage (Vbatt), the charge pump circuit having a plurality of parallel switch paths (Figs. 2 and 3; Abstract: switching transistor bank) coupled in parallel to a flying capacitor (Figs. 2, 3 C1) and configured to receive the supply voltage and alternately provide a first voltage or a second voltage (Vout) the charge pump having a controller (Figs. 2 and 3 #22) to receive the control signal and configured to set a number and switching frequency of the parallel switch paths to be active (Abstract); and
at least one power amplifier (A1) coupled to the audio logic (14 (through A2 and #16)) and to the charge pump circuit (10) and configured to amplify the analog audio signal using the first voltage and the second voltage (Col. 4 lines 23-26 mentions that the charge pump circuit can be in the form of US 20080044041 by Tucker et al. Fig. 2 of that teaching reference shows two output voltages) in response to the control signal.
Claim(s) 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 7830209 by Woodford et al. in view of US 8008975 by Allen et al.
Regarding claim 20, Woodford teaches the audio system of claim 18, and while it mentions that a desirable amplifier system is class-H (Col. 1 lines 32-36), it is silent on the control signal comprising a class H code.
However, Allen teaches an amplifier system with a charge pump that is controlled with a class-H controller. A person of ordinary skill in the art would be able to implement the controller of Woodford with a class H code in order to increase the efficiency of the amplifier (Col. 1 lines 31-34).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 2, 4, 6, 9-10, 12-13, 15, and 19 would be allowable if rewritten to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 2nd paragraph, set forth in this Office action and to include all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
US 8970298 by Zhu teaches an audio amplifier with a multi-level charge pump
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to NAREH SHAMIRYAN whose telephone number is (703)756-4616. The examiner can normally be reached M-F: 7:00AM-4:00PM PT.
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, Andrea Lindgren-Baltzell can be reached at (571) 272-5918. 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.
/NAREH SHAMIRYAN/Examiner, Art Unit 2843
/ANDREA LINDGREN BALTZELL/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2843
Prosecution Insights