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 .
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to the claim(s) have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
Claim Objections
Claim 7, 9 and 10 are objected to because of the following informalities:
Claim 7 recites the limitation "the balance sub-circuit" in line 3. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Claim 6 appears to be attempting to claim plural sub-circuits. So, with claim 7 referring to a single unlabeled sub-circuit it is unclear which sub-circuit the applicant is referring to.
Claim 9 recites the limitation "the nth balance sub-circuit" in line 3. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 10 inherits the same from claim 9.
Claim 12 recites the limitation "the balance sub-circuit to be turned on" in line 3. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Exactly which one is that?
Appropriate correction is required.
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.
(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) 1-7, 11 and 13 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102a2 as being anticipated by Choi et al. (KR20230161558).
Claim 1; Choi et al. (using US12237770) disclose a multi-level converter, comprising: a) a switch capacitor circuit (figure 1) having M flying capacitors and 2*(M+1) transistors (QA-QD), wherein M is a positive integer; b) an inductive element (L); c) a balance circuit (QBAL1 or QBAL2; CFLY_BAL_T or CFLY_BAL_B) coupled directly connected to a common node (SW) of the switch capacitor circuit and the inductive element (L); and ) wherein the balance circuit comprises at least one balance sub-circuit, a balance switch (QBAL1/QBAL2), and a balance capacitor (CFLY_BAL_T or CFLY_BAL_B), and wherein the flying capacitor and the balance capacitor are coupled to each other in one of series and parallel connections (see figs. 4 & 7) by controlling the balance switch to selectively to be turned on and off (fig. 2).
Claim 2; e.g. figs 2, 3 & 4.
Claim 3; common node (SW), upper (QA-QB), lower (QC-QD).
Claims 4 and 5; figure 8: QA: ON, QB: ON; QBAL: OFF, SW = VIN.
Claim 6; M=1; balance switch (QBAL1/QBAL2); balance capacitor (CFLY_BAL_T or CFLY_BAL_B).
Claim 7; M=1, QBAL ON = coupled to Flying Cap. One switch is ON.
Claim 11; bidirectional balance switch (QBAL1/QBAL2).
Claim 13; Choi et al. operates at a duty ratio D less than approximately 0.5.
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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claim(s) 14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Choi et al. in view of Scoones et al. (US 20190028031).
Choi et al. disclose the claimed subject matter in regards to claim 1 supra, except for the balance circuit is configured to control the balance switch to be turned on and turned off based on a voltage on the common node of the switch capacitor circuit and the inductive element.
Scoones teach a controller (not shown) that compares voltage feedback from Vout which is proportional to the voltage at Vsw and inductor L and controls the switches from the feedback.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was effectively filed to modify Choi et al. to include a controller to control the balance switch to be turned on and turned off based on a voltage on the common node of the switch capacitor circuit and the inductive element in order to provide a feedback voltage for the controller to know when to switch the balance switch.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 8 is 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.
Claims 9 and 10 would be allowable if rewritten to overcome the objection(s) set forth in this Office action and to include all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to GARY L LAXTON whose telephone number is (571)272-2079. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday, 8 am-4 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, Crystal Hammond can be reached at 571-270-1682. 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.
/GARY L LAXTON/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2838 6/17/2026
Prosecution Insights