DETAILED ACTION
The instant action is in response to application 25 April 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 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 European Union on 14 January 2022.
Response to Arguments
The drawing objection has been withdrawn.
The claim rejection has been withdrawn.
The 112(b) rejection has been withdrawn.
Applicant incorporated language from claim 4 into previous claim 1, but did not specify how applicant’s invention differed from the previous combination. As such, the remarks fail to comply with 37 CFR 1.111(b) because they amount to a general allegation that the claims define a patentable invention without specifically pointing out how the language of the claims patentably distinguishes them from the references.
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 text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
Claim(s) 1, 12, 16, 17, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Krabbenborg (US 20190131871 ) view of Bao (US 20100066311).
As to claim 1, Krabbenborg discloses (see image below) A control circuit for a boost converter circuit, the control circuit comprising: a switching circuit configured to switch the boost converter to perform cycles, wherein each cycle comprises an energy charging state in which an inductor stores energy provided by an input voltage VBAT and an energy discharging state in which the inductor provides energy to an output of the boost converter; a comparison circuit configured to decide whether a current at the inductor is higher than a predetermined maximum current; and an off-time signal generation circuit configured to generate an off-time signal based on whether the current at the inductor- is higher than reaches the predetermined maximum current, wherein the off-time signal determines a duration TOFF of the energy discharging state of a next switching event, and wherein the switching circuit is configured to switch the boost converter based on the generated off-time signal (its determined by the frequency and the latch 218);
King does not disclose wherein the switching circuit switches the boost converter circuit between a first current operation mode and a second voltage operation mode, wherein the off-time signal generation circuit determines the duration of the energy discharging state and an on-time signal generation circuit determines the duration of the energy charging state; and when the current at the inductor reaches the predetermined maximum current, the boost converter circuit operates in the first current operation mode, and when the current at the inductor does not reach the predetermined maximum current the boost converter circuit operates in the second voltage operation mode.
Bao teaches wherein the switching circuit switches the boost converter circuit between a first current operation mode and a second voltage operation mode, wherein the off-time signal generation circuit determines the duration of the energy discharging state and an on-time signal generation circuit determines the duration of the energy charging state; and when the current at the inductor reaches the predetermined maximum current, the boost converter circuit operates in the first current operation mode, and when the current at the inductor does not reach the predetermined maximum current the boost converter circuit operates in the second voltage operation mode. (Fig. 2 showing transistion between CC and CV modes).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the device above to use CC-CV charging as disclosed in Bao to charge mobile devices.
As to claim 2, Krabbenborg in view of Bao teaches wherein the off-time signal generation means generates the off-time signal if the current at the inductor is higher than the predetermined maximum current (it disables the switch as soon as the threshold is reached, see Figs. 3/4).
As to claim 3, , Krabbenborg in view of Bao teaches where wherein the off-time signal determines the duration TOFF of the energy discharging state based on the input voltage VBAT, a switching frequency fTARGET at which the boost converter performs cycles and an output voltage VBST at the output of the boost converter such that: Toff= Vbat/(Ftarget*Vbst) (see 112 above).
PNG
media_image1.png
421
616
media_image1.png
Greyscale
As to claim 12, King in view of Bao teaches wherein the predetermined maximum current is; Ibatmax + (1-V/bat/Vbst)*(Vbat(2LbstFbst) wherein IBAT, MAX is a maximum current for a battery connected at the input of the boost converter circuit, and an average coil current Icoil,average of the inductor is limited to the IBatmax, VBST is the output voltage, VBAT is the input voltage, fBST is the switching frequency and LBST is the inductance value of the inductor (this appears to control peak current with respect to the average current which is taught by King items 37, 38, and 44).
As to claim 16, Krabbenorg teaches A boost converter circuit comprising: a control circuit; and an input terminal configured to receive the input voltage VBAT, wherein the control circuit comprises: switching means configured to switch the boost converter to perform cycles wherein each cycle comprises an energy charging state in which an inductor stores energy provided by an input voltage VBAT and an energy discharging state in which the inductor provides energy to an output of the boost converter; comparison means configured to decide whether a current at the inductor is higher than a predetermined maximum current; and off-time signal generation means configured to generate an off-time signal based on whether the current at the inductor is higher than the predetermined maximum current, wherein the off-time signal determines a duration TOFF of the energy discharging state of a next switching event and wherein the switching means is configured to switch the boost converter based on the generated off-time signal (this is similar to claim 1 with the exception of the claimed input voltage which is taught by Vbat)
King does not disclose wherein the switching means are configured to switch the boost converter between a first current operation mode and a second voltage operation mode based on whether a current at the inductor is higher than the predetermined maximum current, wherein the first current operation mode is used when the current at the inductor is higher than the predetermined maximum current and the second voltage operation mode is used when the current at the inductor is not higher than the predetermined maximum current.
Bao teaches wherein the switching means are configured to switch the boost converter between a first current operation mode and a second voltage operation mode based on whether a current at the inductor is higher than the predetermined maximum current, wherein the first current operation mode is used when the current at the inductor is higher than the predetermined maximum current and the second voltage operation mode is used when the current at the inductor is not higher than the predetermined maximum current (Fig. 2 showing transistion between CC and CV modes).
As to claim 17, this is a method claim similar to an above apparatus claim and is anticipated per MPEP 2112.02.
As to claim 21, King in view of Bao teaches wherein the first current operation mode, the off time signal generation determines the duration of the energy charging based on a current at the inductor (CC mode would have constant current, and the off time would need to reflect that).
As to claim 22, King in view of Bao teaches wherein the first current operation mode; a duration of Ton of the enrgy charging state of a next switching event is determined by the duration of Too of the energy discharging state of a next switching event and a switching frequency Ftart at which the boost converter performs cycles Ton = 1/Ftarget -Toff (The boost converter has to have enough off time for the current to reset to its target value each cycle. This appears to be taught by the steady state constant current mode).
As to claim 23, King in view of Bao teaches where in the second voltage operation mode, the on-time signal generation circuit determines the duration of the energy charging state based on a current at the inductor (the voltage is governed by the di/dt term in the boost converter).
As to claim 24, King in view of Bao teaches wherein the second voltage operation mode, a duration T’off of the energy charging state of a next switching event is determined by the duration T’on of the energy discharge state of a reset of a next switching event and a switching frequency Ftarget at which the boost converter performs cycles, wherein T’off = 1/ftarget – T’on (this would occur during steady state of the constant voltage operation to hold a voltage steady).
As to claim 25, King in view of Bao teaches where in the second voltage operation mode, the on-time signal generation circuit determines the duration of the energy charging state based on a current at the inductor (the voltage is governed by the di/dt term in the boost converter).
Claims 5, 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over King (US 20190089245)in view of ) view of Bao (US 20100066311) and Yang (US 6768655).
As to claim 5, King in view of Bao teaches an off-time signal generation. He does not teach wherein the off-time signal generation circuit comprises a capacitor and a comparison circuit wherein the capacitor is configured to store a voltage VC,OFF, wherein the comparison circuit comprises a first input, a second input, wherein the comparison circuit is configured to receive a reference voltage VREF,OFF at the first input, to receive the voltage VC,OFF at the second input, and to generate the off-time signal by comparing the reference voltage VREF,OFF and the voltage VC,OFF.
Yang teaches wherein the off-time signal generation circuit comprises a capacitor and a comparison circuit wherein the capacitor is configured to store a voltage VC,OFF, wherein the comparison circuit comprises a first input, a second input, wherein the comparison circuit is configured to receive a reference voltage VREF,OFF at the first input, to receive the voltage VC,OFF at the second input, and to generate the off-time signal by comparing the reference voltage VREF,OFF and the voltage VC,OFF (Yang Fig 4 is regarded as similar to applicant’s Fig. 2B, item 104).
As to claim 19, this is a method claim similar to an above apparatus claim and is obvious per MPEP 2112.02.
Claims 13-14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over King (US 20190089245 ) view of Bao (US 20100066311) and Luff (US 20190140542).
As to claim 13, King does not teach wherein the switching circuit are implemented as a state machine.
Luff teaches wherein the switching circuit are implemented as a state machine (Fig. 13).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the device above to use buck-boost topology as disclosed in Luff to increase or decrease the voltage.
As to claim 14, King in view of Bao and Luff teaches wherein the state machine comprises eight states and is configured to perform a transition from one of the eight states (Fig. 13) to another one of the eight states based on whether the current at the inductor is higher than the predetermined maximum current.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 6-11, 20 would be allowable if rewritten 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 6, the prior art fails to disclose: “further comprising on-time signal generation circuit comprising another capacitor and another comparison circuit wherein the another capacitor is configured to store another voltage VC,ON, wherein the another comparison circuit comprises a first input, a second input, wherein the another comparison circuit is configured to receive another reference voltage VREF,ON at the first input, to receive the another voltage VC,ON at the second input, and to generate an on-time signal by comparing the another reference voltage VREF,ON and the another voltage VC,ON.” in combination with the additionally claimed features, as are claimed by the Applicant.
As to claim 20, the prior art fails to disclose " further comprising on-time signal generation circuit comprising another capacitor and another comparison circuit wherein the another capacitor is configured to store another voltage VC,ON, wherein the another comparison circuit comprises a first input, a second input, wherein the another comparison circuit is configured to receive another reference voltage VREF,ON at the first input, to receive the another voltage VC,ON at the second input, and to generate an on-time signal by comparing the another reference voltage and the another voltage VC,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.
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 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, Crystal Hammon can be reached on 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 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
Prosecution Insights