Detailed Office 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 .
Abstract
Applicant is reminded of the proper language and format for an abstract of the disclosure. The abstract should be in narrative form and generally limited to a single paragraph on a separate sheet within the range of 50 to 150 words in length. The abstract should describe the disclosure sufficiently to assist readers in deciding whether there is a need for consulting the full patent text for details. The language should be clear and concise and should not repeat information given in the title. It should avoid using phrases which can be implied, such as, “The disclosure concerns,” “The disclosure defined by this invention,” “The disclosure describes,” etc. In addition, the form and legal phraseology often used in patent claims, such as “means” and “said,” should be avoided.
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 – 3, 4, 13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Straeussnigg et al. (US Patent Number 11,139,820).
Regarding claim 1, Straeussnigg et al. disclose an interface output (figs. 1 – 4) for a capacitive sensor (MEMS 102, fig. 1) comprising: a circuit to sample (106, fig. 1) an input signal from the capacitive sensor (MEMS), convert the sampled input signal to a digital signal (114, fig. 1) and having an adjustable gain (digital gains) (col. 2, lines 56 – 59).
PNG
media_image1.png
593
787
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 2, Straeussnigg et al. disclose a circuit (figs. 1 – 4) wherein the capacitive sensor is a MEMs sensor (102, fig. 1).
Regarding claim 3, Straeussnigg et al. disclose a circuit (figs. 1 – 4) wherein circuit comprises: an analog to digital converter (ADC) (106, fig. 1) receiving the sampled input signal; an output(108, 110, 112A, fig. 1) coupled to the ADC applying a gain correction (digital gains)to generate an amplified digital output signal (114, fig. 1).
Regarding claim 4, Straeussnigg et al. disclose a circuit (figs. 1 – 4) , wherein circuit comprises a sampling circuit (106, fig. 1) coupled to the capacitive sensor (102, fig. 1) taking a sample of the input signal and amplifying (digital gains) the sample of the input signal (fig. 1).
Regarding claim 13, Straeussnigg et al. disclose a circuit (figs. 1 – 4) to convert charge information input from a Micro Electro Mechanical (MEM) capacitive sensor (102, fig. 1) comprising: a sampling circuit (106, fig. 1) sampling an input signal from the MEM capacitive sensor(102, fig. 1) and converting the sampled input signal to amplified charge information (fig. 1); an analog to digital converter (ADC) (106, fig. 1) receiving the amplified charge information; an output (108, 220, 112A, fig. 1) coupled to the ADC applying a gain correction (digital gains) to generate an amplified digital output signal (114, fig. 1).
PNG
media_image1.png
593
787
media_image1.png
Greyscale
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 8 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Straeussnigg et al. (US Patent Number 11,139,820) in view of Xu et al. (US Patent Number 11,606,100).
Regarding claim 8, Straeussnigg et al. disclose all the limitations discussed above except the circuit wherein the output device comprises a digital range scaling and reconstruction block, the controller sending the output to the digital range scaling and reconstruction block to adjust the gain of the amplified sample. However, Xu et al., in a related field, disclose a circuit (figs. 3, 4) wherein the output device comprises a digital range scaling and reconstruction block (908, fig. 9) , the controller (102) sending the output to the digital range scaling and reconstruction block to adjust the gain of the amplified sample (figs. 3, 4, 9). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the filing of the invention to modify Straeussnigg et al.’s circuit with that of Xu et al. for the purpose of improving the circuit.
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 9, 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Straeussnigg et al. (US Patent Number 11,139,820) in view of Fon et al. (USPGPUB 2022/0385299).
Regarding claims 9 and 18, Straeussnigg et al. disclose all the limitations discussed above except the circuit wherein the ADC is a Nyquist rate ADC. However, Nyquist rate ADC is well known in the art; Fon et al. disclose a system where a Nyquist rate ADC is used (see paragraph 0047). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the filing of the invention to modify Straeussnigg et al.’s system with that of Fon et al. in order to improve the performance of the circuit.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 10 – 12 are allowable.
Claims 5 – 7, 14 - 17 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.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JEAN BRUNER JEANGLAUDE whose telephone number is (571)272-1804. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Thursday 7:00 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, Dameon Levi can be reached at 571-272-2105. 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.
/JEAN B JEANGLAUDE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2845