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
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 04 February 2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant argues with respect to 35 USC 112(f) that the amendment to “image acquisition apparatus” does not invoke 35 USC 112(f) (p. 8). The examiner disagrees.
As explained in MPEP § 2181, subsection I, claim limitations that meet the following three-prong test will be interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
(A) the claim limitation uses the term “means” or “step” or a term used as a substitute for “means” that is a generic placeholder (also called a nonce term or a non-structural term having no specific structural meaning) for performing the claimed function;
(B) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is modified by functional language, typically, but not always linked by the transition word “for” (e.g., “means for”) or another linking word or phrase, such as “configured to” or “so that”; and
(C) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is not modified by sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function.
In the case of “image acquisition apparatus” in the claims:
the claim limitation term uses a substitute for means that is a generic placeholder, i.e. “apparatus”
the term is modified by functional language, i.e. “image acquisition” or “configured to use the electric energy stored in the energy storage circuit for powering during image acquisition”
is not modified by sufficient structure, material or acts for performing the claimed function, i.e. the claim does not provide any specific structure which modifies the “image acquisition apparatus”
Thus all three prongs of the three-prong test are met and the limitation “image acquisition apparatus” is properly considered to invoke 35 USC 112(f).
Applicant further argues based on the specification that a person having ordinary skill in the art would understand that the “image acquisition apparatus” includes but is not limited to a camera, a video camera or a TOF depth camera (p. 8). While the examiner agrees that the paragraph cited provides corresponding structure for the term “image acquisition apparatus” as interpreted under 35 USC 112(f), the disclosure of paragraph 0029 does not alter the results of the three-prong test discussed above.
With respect to the amended claims, Applicant argues that Xu does not disclose “wherein, the energy storage circuit comprises: an energy storage capacitor configured to store the electric energy of the power supply in the energy storage capacitor, and the energy storage circuit further comprises a first filter capacitor arranged in parallel with the energy storage capacitor and configured to filter out AC electricity”.
The examiner disagrees. Specifically, Xu discloses wherein the capacitor 208 may include two or more capacitors arranged in parallel (Paragraph 0026: “In some cases, the capacitor may comprise two or more capacitors of any capacitance, such as two or more capacitors (not necessarily supercapacitors) connected in parallel”).
Since the two or more capacitors would have the same arrangement as those in Figure 1D of the specification, the parallel capacitor(s) would form a filter which would filter out AC electricity in the same manner as claimed (see MPEP 2112.01(I)).
However, even if the second parallel capacitor were not considered to form a filter, the amendments do not place the application in condition for allowance based on the teachings of Abou-Alfotouh et al. (US 2010/0164650 A1) as discussed in the alternative set of rejections below.
For these reasons Applicant’s arguments are not considered persuasive and rejections based on Xu or Xu in view of Abou-Alfotouh as made below.
Claim Interpretation
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
(f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The claims in this application are given their broadest reasonable interpretation using the plain meaning of the claim language in light of the specification as it would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art. The broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim element (also commonly referred to as a claim limitation) is limited by the description in the specification when 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is invoked.
As explained in MPEP § 2181, subsection I, claim limitations that meet the following three-prong test will be interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
(A) the claim limitation uses the term “means” or “step” or a term used as a substitute for “means” that is a generic placeholder (also called a nonce term or a non-structural term having no specific structural meaning) for performing the claimed function;
(B) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is modified by functional language, typically, but not always linked by the transition word “for” (e.g., “means for”) or another linking word or phrase, such as “configured to” or “so that”; and
(C) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is not modified by sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function.
Use of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim with functional language creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites sufficient structure, material, or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Absence of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is not to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is not interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites function without reciting sufficient structure, material or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Claim limitations in this application that use the word “means” (or “step”) are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. Conversely, claim limitations in this application that do not use the word “means” (or “step”) are not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action.
This application includes one or more claim limitations that do not use the word “means,” but are nonetheless being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, because the claim limitation(s) uses a generic placeholder that is coupled with functional language without reciting sufficient structure to perform the recited function and the generic placeholder is not preceded by a structural modifier. Such claim limitation(s) is/are:
“an image acquisition apparatus” in claims 1-16
Because this/these claim limitation(s) is/are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, it/they is/are being interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof.
If applicant does not intend to have this/these limitation(s) interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, applicant may: (1) amend the claim limitation(s) to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph (e.g., by reciting sufficient structure to perform the claimed function); or (2) present a sufficient showing that the claim limitation(s) recite(s) sufficient structure to perform the claimed function so as to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph.
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 (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 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) 1, 3, 9, 11 and 17-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Xu et al. (US 2013/0093514 A1).[claim 1]
Regarding claim 1, Xu discloses a powering device for image acquisition (Figures 7 and 12), comprising: an energy storage circuit connected to a power supply and configured to store electric energy of the power supply (Figure 7, 208; Figure 12, 424);
and an image acquisition apparatus (Paragraph 0033)
wherein, the energy storage circuit comprises: an energy storage capacitor configured to store the electric energy of the power supply in the energy storage capacitor (Paragraph 0026; one of the capacitors of the two or more capacitors storing energy supplied by buck-boost converter 210), and
the energy storage circuit further comprises a first filter capacitor arranged in parallel with the energy storage capacitor and configured to filter out AC electricity (Paragraph 0026; a second capacitor of the two or more capacitors connected in parallel).
While Xu does not explicitly describe filtering out AC electricity with the second capacitor, the capacitor would share the same arrangement as the capacitors described in the specification (i.e. arranged in parallel with the storage capacitor between an output node of the converter 210 and ground (see Figure 7 of Xu and Figure 1D of the specification) and thus would provide some degree of filtering of AC present at the output node due to the common arrangement. See MPEP 2112.01(I):
Where the claimed and prior art products are identical or substantially identical in structure or composition, or are produced by identical or substantially identical processes, a prima facie case of either anticipation or obviousness has been established. In re Best, 562 F.2d 1252, 1255, 195 USPQ 430, 433 (CCPA 1977). "When the PTO shows a sound basis for believing that the products of the applicant and the prior art are the same, the applicant has the burden of showing that they are not." In re Spada, 911 F.2d 705, 709, 15 USPQ2d 1655, 1658 (Fed. Cir. 1990).
However, Xu does not explicitly show that the image acquisition apparatus is connected to the energy storage circuit and configured to use the electric energy stored in the energy storage circuit for powering during image acquisition.
However, it is noted that Xu discloses that the camera may consume power when generating a flash or taking a photograph. Xu further discloses that the energy storage circuit may be used to power other components of the system (Paragraph 0032). Therefore, it would have been obvious to provide a power converter system for the image acquisition apparatus of Xu so that isolated power may be provided to the image acquisition apparatus to reduce the impact of other system components on image capture (e.g. Paragraph 0020).[claim 3]
Regarding claim 3, Xu discloses wherein the energy storage circuit further comprises: a boost circuit connected between the power supply and the energy storage capacitor, and configured to increase a voltage of the power supply to a first voltage and store the electric energy of the first voltage in the energy storage capacitor (Figure 12, 420); and a buck circuit connected between the energy storage capacitor and the image acquisition apparatus, and configured to reduce the electric energy of the first voltage stored in the energy storage capacitor to a second voltage, and provide the electric energy of the second voltage to the image acquisition apparatus (Figure 12, 422). See also Paragraph 0051.[claims 9 and 11]
Regarding claims 9 and 11, see the rejection of claims 1 and 3 above and note that Xu discloses electronic equipment comprising a power supply (Figure 1; Figure 7, 204; Figure 12, 404) and the powering device for image acquisition connected to the power supply (see the rejections above).[claims 17 and 18]
Claims 17 and 18 are method claims corresponding to apparatus claims 1 and 2. Therefore, claims 17 and 18 are analyzed and rejected as previously discussed with respect to claims 1 and 2.[claims 19 and 20]
Claims 19 and 20 are method claims corresponding to apparatus claim 3. Therefore, claims 19 and 20 are analyzed and rejected as previously discussed with respect to claim 3.
Claim(s) 4-6 and 12-14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Xu et al. (US 2013/0093514 A1) in view of Texas Instruments – LM1577/LM2577 SIMPLE SWITCHER® Step-Up Voltage Regulator, hereinafter LM1577[claim 4]
Regarding claim 4, Xu does not explicitly disclose wherein the boost circuit comprises: a boost inductor connected between the power supply and the energy storage capacitor, and configured to increase a voltage of the power supply; and a boost control chip arranged in parallel with the boost inductor, and configured to set the first voltage and control the boost inductor to increase the voltage of the power supply to the first voltage before charging the energy storage capacitor, wherein a voltage of the energy storage capacitor after charging is the first voltage.
LM1577discloses a boost circuit which is cost effective, simply to use and may provide a fixed or adjustable output voltage (p. 1, DESCRIPTION). The boost converter of TO includes a boost inductor connected between an input and an output, and configured to increase a voltage of the power supply (p. 2, Typical Application, 100uF inductor); and a boost control chip arranged in parallel with the boost inductor, and configured to set the first voltage and control the boost inductor to increase the voltage of the power supply to the first voltage (p. 2, Typical Application, LM2577). Therefore, it would have been obvious to use a boost circuit as taught by LM1577to provide a boost of the voltage between the power supply and the storage capacitor in a cost effective and simple to use manner and so that the voltage provided to the storage capacitor may be boosted from the power supply voltage.
Note that the combined system of Xu and LM1577 would have the claimed features of claim 4.[claim 5]
Regarding claim 5, Xu in view of LM1577discloses wherein the boost circuit further comprises: a rectifier diode connected between the boost inductor and the energy storage capacitor, and configured to rectify the boosted current (TI, p. 2, Typical Application, diode 1N5821).[claim 6]
Regarding claim 6, Xu in view of LM1577discloses a boost feedback circuit, wherein an output terminal of the rectifier diode is connected to a first voltage feedback interface of the boost control chip through the boost feedback circuit wherein the boost feedback circuit is configured to feed back the voltage rectified by the rectifier diode to the boost control chip, to cause the boost control chip to control an operation of the boost inductor based on the fed back rectified voltage (TI, p. 2, Typical Application, circuit formed by R1 and R2 connected to output of diode and FEED-BACK input of LM2577-ADJ).[claims 12-14]
Regarding claims 12-14, see the rejection of claim 11 as well as the rejection of claims 4-6 above respectively.
Claim(s) 7, 8, 15 and 16 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Xu et al. (US 2013/0093514 A1) in view of Texas Instruments – LM5163-Q1 100-V Input, 0.5-A Synchronous Buck DC/DC Converter with Ultra-low IQ, hereinafter LM5163.[claim 7]
Regarding claim 7, Xu does not explicitly disclose wherein the buck circuit comprises: a buck control chip connected to the energy storage capacitor, and configured to set the second voltage; and a buck inductor connected between the buck control chip and the image acquisition apparatus, and configured to reduce the first voltage of the energy storage capacitor to the second voltage according to the control of the buck control chip, and provide the electric energy of the second voltage to the image acquisition apparatus.
LM5163 discloses a buck circuit with a reduced solution size and cost among other features (p. 1, Features and Description). The buck circuit of LM5163 comprises: a buck control chip connected to an input, and configured to set a second voltage (p. 1, Typical Application, LM5163-Q1); and a buck inductor connected between the buck control chip and an output, and configured to reduce the first voltage of the input to the second voltage according to the control of the buck control chip, and provide the electric energy of the second voltage to output (p. 1, Typical Application, Lo 120uH). Therefore, it would have been obvious to use a buck circuit as taught by LM5163 to provide an output voltage using a circuit having reduce solution size and cost among other benefits.
Note that the combined system of Xu and LM5163 would have the claimed features of claim 7.[claim 8]
Regarding claim 8, Xu in view of LM in view of LM5163 discloses wherein the buck circuit further comprises: a buck feedback circuit, wherein an output end of the buck inductor is connected to a second voltage feedback interface of the buck control chip through the buck feedback circuit (LM5163, p. 1, Typical Application, output of inductor connected to RFB1 and RFB2 and FB input of LM5163-Q1); wherein the buck feedback circuit is configured to feed back the voltage bucked by the buck inductor to the buck control chip, to cause the buck control chip to control an operation of the buck inductor based on the fed back bucked voltage (p. 1, Typical Application, see also 7.2 Functional Block Diagram and FEEDBACK COMPARATOR).[claims 15 and 16]
Regarding claims 15 and 16, see the rejection of claim 11 as well as the rejection of claims 7 and 8 above respectively.
Alternatively, claim(s) 1, 3, 9, 11 and 17-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Xu et al. (US 2013/0093514 A1) in view of Abou-Alfotouh et al. (US 2010/0164650 A1).
Note that Xu appears to disclose an identical arrangement of a two capacitors in parallel and thus arguably teaches all limitations of the claims (see rejections above). However, even if these capacitors cannot be said to be “configured to filter out AC electricity”, the claims would still be considered obvious over Xu in view of Abou-Alfotouh as discussed below.[claim 1]
Regarding claim 1, Xu discloses a powering device for image acquisition (Figures 7 and 12), comprising: an energy storage circuit connected to a power supply and configured to store electric energy of the power supply (Figure 7, 208; Figure 12, 424); and
an image acquisition apparatus (Paragraph 0033),
wherein, the energy storage circuit comprises: an energy storage capacitor configured to store the electric energy of the power supply in the energy storage capacitor (Paragraph 0026; Figure 7, storage capacitor 208).
However, Xu does not explicitly show that the image acquisition apparatus is connected to the energy storage circuit and configured to use the electric energy stored in the energy storage circuit for powering during image acquisition.
However, it is noted that Xu discloses that the camera may consume power when generating a flash or taking a photograph. Xu further discloses that the energy storage circuit may be used to power other components of the system (Paragraph 0032). Therefore, it would have been obvious to provide a power converter system for the image acquisition apparatus of Xu so that isolated power may be provided to the image acquisition apparatus to reduce the impact of other system components on image capture (e.g. Paragraph 0020).
However, while Xu discloses wherein the energy storage circuit further comprises a second capacitor arranged in parallel with the energy storage capacitor (Paragraph 0026; a second capacitor of the two or more capacitors connected in parallel), Xu arguably does not explicitly disclose that the second capacitor is configured to filter out AC electricity.
Abou-Alfotouh teaches an output filter (Figure 12) for a power converter such as a buck or boost converter (Paragraph 0005, 0021-0022) including a capacitor which is provided in parallel with an output to a load and configured to filter out AC electricity (Figure 12, Cout2; Paragraph 0052; note that high frequency ripple is a form of AC electricity).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to provide an output filter including a filter capacitor arranged in parallel for converter 210 of Xu as taught by Abou-Alfotouh so that AC electricity such as high frequency ripple may be filtered out thereby removing noise and providing more stable DC electricity to the load, i.e. storage capacitor 208.[claim 3]
Regarding claim 3, Xu discloses wherein the energy storage circuit further comprises: a boost circuit connected between the power supply and the energy storage capacitor, and configured to increase a voltage of the power supply to a first voltage and store the electric energy of the first voltage in the energy storage capacitor (Figure 12, 420); and a buck circuit connected between the energy storage capacitor and the image acquisition apparatus, and configured to reduce the electric energy of the first voltage stored in the energy storage capacitor to a second voltage, and provide the electric energy of the second voltage to the image acquisition apparatus (Figure 12, 422). See also Paragraph 0051.[claims 9 and 11]
Regarding claims 9 and 11, see the rejection of claims 1 and 3 above and note that Xu discloses electronic equipment comprising a power supply (Figure 1; Figure 7, 204; Figure 12, 404) and the powering device for image acquisition connected to the power supply (see the rejections above).[claims 17 and 18]
Claims 17 and 18 are method claims corresponding to apparatus claims 1 and 2. Therefore, claims 17 and 18 are analyzed and rejected as previously discussed with respect to claims 1 and 2.[claims 19 and 20]
Claims 19 and 20 are method claims corresponding to apparatus claim 3. Therefore, claims 19 and 20 are analyzed and rejected as previously discussed with respect to claim 3.
Alternatively, claim(s) 4-6 and 12-14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Xu et al. (US 2013/0093514 A1) in view of Abou-Alfotouh et al. (US 2010/0164650 A1) in view of Texas Instruments – LM1577/LM2577 SIMPLE SWITCHER® Step-Up Voltage Regulator, hereinafter LM1577[claim 4]
Regarding claim 4, Xu in view of Abou-Alfotouh does not explicitly disclose wherein the boost circuit comprises: a boost inductor connected between the power supply and the energy storage capacitor, and configured to increase a voltage of the power supply; and a boost control chip arranged in parallel with the boost inductor, and configured to set the first voltage and control the boost inductor to increase the voltage of the power supply to the first voltage before charging the energy storage capacitor, wherein a voltage of the energy storage capacitor after charging is the first voltage.
LM1577discloses a boost circuit which is cost effective, simply to use and may provide a fixed or adjustable output voltage (p. 1, DESCRIPTION). The boost converter of TO includes a boost inductor connected between an input and an output, and configured to increase a voltage of the power supply (p. 2, Typical Application, 100uF inductor); and a boost control chip arranged in parallel with the boost inductor, and configured to set the first voltage and control the boost inductor to increase the voltage of the power supply to the first voltage (p. 2, Typical Application, LM2577). Therefore, it would have been obvious to use a boost circuit as taught by LM1577 to provide a boost of the voltage between the power supply and the storage capacitor in a cost effective and simple to use manner and so that the voltage provided to the storage capacitor may be boosted from the power supply voltage.
Note that the combined system of Xu in view of Abou-Alfotouh and LM1577 would have the claimed features of claim 4.[claim 5]
Regarding claim 5, Xu in view of Abou-Alfotouh in view of LM1577 discloses wherein the boost circuit further comprises: a rectifier diode connected between the boost inductor and the energy storage capacitor, and configured to rectify the boosted current (TI, p. 2, Typical Application, diode 1N5821).[claim 6]
Regarding claim 6, Xu in view of Abou-Alfotouh in view of LM1577 discloses a boost feedback circuit, wherein an output terminal of the rectifier diode is connected to a first voltage feedback interface of the boost control chip through the boost feedback circuit wherein the boost feedback circuit is configured to feed back the voltage rectified by the rectifier diode to the boost control chip, to cause the boost control chip to control an operation of the boost inductor based on the fed back rectified voltage (TI, p. 2, Typical Application, circuit formed by R1 and R2 connected to output of diode and FEED-BACK input of LM2577-ADJ).[claims 12-14]
Regarding claims 12-14, see the rejection of claim 11 as well as the rejection of claims 4-6 above respectively.
Alternatively, claim(s) 7, 8, 15 and 16 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Xu et al. (US 2013/0093514 A1) in view of Abou-Alfotouh et al. (US 2010/0164650 A1) in view of Texas Instruments – LM5163-Q1 100-V Input, 0.5-A Synchronous Buck DC/DC Converter with Ultra-low IQ, hereinafter LM5163.[claim 7]
Regarding claim 7, Xu in view of Abou-Alfotouh does not explicitly disclose wherein the buck circuit comprises: a buck control chip connected to the energy storage capacitor, and configured to set the second voltage; and a buck inductor connected between the buck control chip and the image acquisition apparatus, and configured to reduce the first voltage of the energy storage capacitor to the second voltage according to the control of the buck control chip, and provide the electric energy of the second voltage to the image acquisition apparatus.
LM5163 discloses a buck circuit with a reduced solution size and cost among other features (p. 1, Features and Description). The buck circuit of LM5163 comprises: a buck control chip connected to an input, and configured to set a second voltage (p. 1, Typical Application, LM5163-Q1); and a buck inductor connected between the buck control chip and an output, and configured to reduce the first voltage of the input to the second voltage according to the control of the buck control chip, and provide the electric energy of the second voltage to output (p. 1, Typical Application, Lo 120uH). Therefore, it would have been obvious to use a buck circuit as taught by LM5163 to provide an output voltage using a circuit having reduce solution size and cost among other benefits.
Note that the combined system of Xu in view of Abou-Alfotouh and LM5163 would have the claimed features of claim 7.[claim 8]
Regarding claim 8, Xu in view of Abou-Alfotouh in view of LM5163 discloses wherein the buck circuit further comprises: a buck feedback circuit, wherein an output end of the buck inductor is connected to a second voltage feedback interface of the buck control chip through the buck feedback circuit (LM5163, p. 1, Typical Application, output of inductor connected to RFB1 and RFB2 and FB input of LM5163-Q1); wherein the buck feedback circuit is configured to feed back the voltage bucked by the buck inductor to the buck control chip, to cause the buck control chip to control an operation of the buck inductor based on the fed back bucked voltage (p. 1, Typical Application, see also 7.2 Functional Block Diagram and FEEDBACK COMPARATOR).[claims 15 and 16]
Regarding claims 15 and 16, see the rejection of claim 11 as well as the rejection of claims 7 and 8 above respectively.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. The following prior art references show additional systems having arrangements similar to those claimed:
Tian et al. US 2023/0283185 A1
Zhu et al. US 2018/0241243 A1
Dicke et al. US 2017/0271982 A1
Chen et al. US 2016/0164428 A1
Li et al. US 2011/0122662 A1
Bean et al. US 2004/0036449 A1
Additionally, various Texas Instruments datasheets teach the use of output capacitor filter circuits:
“TPS61022 8-A Boost Converter with 0.5-V Ultra-low Input Voltage” (p. 18, Figure 8-13, C2) and “TPS61022 and TPS61023 Boost Converters Layout Guidelines” (p. 3, Figure 4, C4-C6) show the use of 3 parallel capacitors connected to the output node of the circuit to reduce ripple voltages.
“Input and Output Capacitor Selection” describes general principles for selecting output capacitors for switching regulators.
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 TIMOTHY J HENN whose telephone number is (571)272-7310. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday ~10-6.
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, Twyler Haskins can be reached at (571) 272-7406. 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.
/Timothy J Henn/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2639