DETAILED ACTION
The instant action is in response to application 15 March 2024.
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 .
Specification
The specification is objected to for the following informalities:
The publication date of the Taiwanese application should be included in the first paragraph.
¶5, 6, 8, 11 are run on sentences and not proper English grammar. Applicant is cordially reminded that they are only limited to one sentence in the claims.
The specification has not been checked to the extent necessary to determine the presence of all possible minor errors. Applicant's cooperation is requested in correcting any errors of which applicant may become aware in the specification.
Priority
Acknowledgment is made of applicant's claim for foreign priority based on an application filed in Taiwan on 20 December 2023
Claim Objections
Claim 1 is objected to for the following informalities: Claim 1 has the line “is turned on” in line 21 and “to be ON” in line 38, while the specification makes clear what is meant, a number of switches turn on to interrupt current as well as conduct current. As such, in order to ensure clarity, “the circulation switch is turned on” should be “the circulation switch conducts”. In a similar manner, “the switch is controlled to conduct”.
Claim 2 has a similar problem to claim 1 line 38 and is objected to for a similar reason.
Claim 6 and 7 have a similar problem to claim 1, line 21 and is objected to for a similar reason.
Claims 2—11 depend on claim 1 and inherit the objections based on their dependency.
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 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.
For method claims, note that under MPEP 2112.02, the principles of inherency, if a prior art device, in its normal and usual operation, would necessarily perform the method claimed, then the method claimed will be considered to be anticipated by the prior art device. When the prior art device is the same as a device described in the specification for carrying out the claimed method, it can be assumed the device will inherently perform the claimed process. In re King, 801 F.2d 1324, 231 USPQ 136 (Fed. Cir. 1986). Therefore the previous rejections based on the apparatus will not be repeated. (The claims have been condensed.)
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.
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 of this title, 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, 4, 5, 10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Huang (US 20220321001).
As to claim 1, Huang teaches a switching converter circuit (Fig. 2), which is configured to operably convert an input power (Vunreg) to an output power (vout), wherein the input power includes an input voltage and the output power includes an output voltage; the switching converter circuit comprising: a feedback compensation circuit (Fig. 5, 13), which is configured to operably generate a feedback compensation signal (Fig. 5 RST) according to a difference between a feedback signal related to the output power (Fig. 5 Vout) and a reference signal (Fig. 5, Vref); a modulation circuit (Fig. 5, 300, 304, 301), which is configured to operably generate a modulation signal in accordance with the feedback compensation signal and a ramp signal having a switching cycle (RST resets the Ramp signal); a power stage circuit including a plurality of power switches (Fig. 2, 111, 112), wherein the plurality of power switches are configured to operably switch an inductor (Fig. 2, 113) according to the modulation signal, thus converting the input power to the output power, wherein the inductor is coupled between a switching node (N12) and the output power, wherein the plurality of power switches include a circulation switch (112), wherein the circulation switch is coupled in parallel to the inductor (the inductor goes via 114 to ground, and the switch goes directly to ground from the same node), wherein when the circulation switch is turned ON, the inductor and the circulation switch constitute a circulation circuit (current circulates in 112, 113, 114 when 112 is closed and 111 is open); a current sensing circuit (Fig. 5, item 50), which is configured to operably generate a current sensing signal, wherein the current sensing signal is related to an inductor current flowing through the inductor (it senses inductor current directly); and a control and driver circuit (302, 303), which is configured to operably generate a driving signal according to the modulation signal and the current sensing signal, wherein the driving signal is configured to operably control the plurality (111 is controlled directly, but 112 is also taught in the specification. See ¶29 “In another embodiment, the switch 112 (implemented by an NMOS transistor MN) can be controlled by an inductor-current detection signal and the switching signal SWH instead.”) of power switches; wherein in a step-down mode ( a buck converter will always step down voltage), the plurality of power switches are configured to operably switch the switching node (Fig. 4a/4b), so that a switching node voltage at the switching node is switched between the input voltage and a ground potential (Fig. 2, N12),
As to the limitation, that a switching node voltage at the switching node is switched between the input voltage and a ground potential, thus converting the input power to the output power, wherein the input voltage is greater than or equal to the output voltage; wherein in the step-down mode, this is a function of the ratio of the switched capacitor converter 10 and therefore obvious. Though not explicitly taught, having switched capacitor converters output multiples and integral fractions is old and well known and therefore not patentable (See MPEP 2144.03 and US 2011008996 ¶4, US 20110062940 ¶5, US 5397928 Col. 1, lines 30-40). If the switched capacitor steps down the voltage, it reads on the claim. The expected advantage of more voltage would be less current, and vice versa for higher voltage.
As to claim 4, Huang teaches wherein the ramp signal is generated according to a clock signal having the switching cycle, wherein the switching cycle has a constant period, such that the modulation signal has the constant period (fig. 5 shows the ramp dependent upon the clock signal).
As to claim 5, Huang teaches wherein the modulation circuit is configured to operably compare the feedback compensation signal with the ramp signal having the constant period (clock signals multiplexed would have a constant period), so as to decide a duty ratio of the modulation signal, thereby regulating an electrical characteristic of the output power to a target value (the duty cycle determines the votlage drop from the midpoint voltage).
As to claim 10, Huang teaches wherein a time length of the circulation period is correlated with a stability of the switching converter circuit and/or a power conversion efficiency of the switching converter circuit (the system would not work without the circulating period).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 2, 3, 6, 7, 8, 9, 11 would be allowable if rewritten to comply with formal requirements set forth in this Office action and to include 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:
As to claim 2, the prior art fails to disclose: “wherein the plurality of power switches are further configured to operably switch a capacitor, wherein an end of the capacitor is coupled to the switching node; wherein in a step-up mode, the plurality of power switches are configured to operably switch the capacitor and the inductor, so that the switching node voltage at the switching node is switched between a pumped voltage and the input voltage, thus converting the input power to the output power, wherein the pumped voltage is greater than the input voltage, and wherein the pumped voltage is related to the input voltage and a voltage across the capacitor, wherein the output voltage lies between the pumped voltage and the input voltage; wherein in the step-up mode, within the circulation period in each switching cycle, the circulation switch is controlled to be ON, so that the switching node voltage is conducted to the output voltage, whereby the inductor current circulates within the circulation circuit with a second DC current level; wherein in a steady state, the second DC current level is lower than the peak of the inductor current.” in combination with the additionally claimed features, as are claimed by the Applicant.
As to claim 6, the prior art fails to disclose: “further comprising: a sample and hold circuit; wherein in the step-down mode, subsequent to a first time point at which the inductor begins to be demagnetized, at a second time point after a preset delay time has passed by the first time point, the sample and hold circuit is configured to operably sample and hold the current sensing signal, so as to obtain a step-down sample level, wherein within the present switching cycle, when the current sensing signal decreases to reach the step-down sample level, the circulation period corresponding to the present switching cycle is initiated and the circulation switch is turned ON; and/or wherein in the step-up mode, subsequent to a third time point at which the inductor begins to be demagnetized, at a fourth time point after the preset delay time has passed by the third time point, the sample and hold circuit is configured to operably sample and hold the current sensing signal, so as to obtain a step-up sample level, wherein within the present switching cycle, when the current sensing signal decreases to reach the step-up sample level, the circulation period corresponding to the present switching cycle is initiated and the circulation switch is turned ON.” in combination with the additionally claimed features, as are claimed by the Applicant.
Please note: while objected or allowed claims have been indicated, only the presented claims have been examined for compliance with form and 35 USC 112 consideration. As a reminder, claims that are dependent upon objected claims still require examination for form and 35 USC 112 issues even if they overcome 35 USC 102 and 103 rejections. Similarly, amendments incorporating allowable subject matter into independent claims requires reconsideration for dependent claim form and any possible 35 USC 112 issues that arise through amendments even if the 35 USC 102 and 103 rejections are overcome. As such, applicant is advised that while examiner can enter previously allowed claims or previously objected claims rewritten into independent form after final rejection, any other claims may not be entered.
Conclusion
Examiner has cited particular column, paragraph, and line numbers in the references applied to the claims above for the convenience of the applicant. Although the specified citations are representative of the teachings of the art and are applied to specific limitations within the individual claim, other passages and figures may apply as well. It is respectfully requested from the applicant in preparing responses, to fully consider the references in their entirety as potentially teaching all or part of the claimed invention, as well as the context of the passage as taught by the prior art or disclosed by the Examiner. In the case of amending the claimed invention, Applicant is respectfully requested to indicate the portion(s) of the specification which dictate(s) the structure relied on for proper interpretation and also to verify and ascertain the metes and bounds of the claimed invention.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to PETER M NOVAK whose telephone number is (571)270-1375. The examiner can normally be reached on 9AM-5PM,Monday through Thursday, 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, Thienvu Tran can be reached on 571-270-1276. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see https://ppair-my.uspto.gov/pair/PrivatePair. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/PETER M NOVAK/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2839