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 .
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claim 4 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Regarding claim 4, the limitation “second voltage transformer and/or the charging device” gives rise to multiple options thereby being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor(s) regards as the invention.
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(s) 1-2, 5 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 2013/0106179 (Sievers) in view of US 2019/0161043 (Schumacher).
Regarding claim 1, Sievers teaches a method for starting up an electronic circuit for an airbag system [0009-0010], wherein the electronic circuit is configured to ignite an airbag of the airbag system [0033-0034], wherein, in the electronic circuit, an output of a first voltage transformer (Fig. 1 shows output of step-up converter AW) is connected to an input of a second voltage transformer (Fig. 1 shows input of DC1 connected to output of step-up converter AW) [0032], an output of the second voltage transformer (Fig. 1 shows output of DC1) is connected to an input of a charging device (Fig. 1 shows input of LSQ is connected to the output of DC1), and an output of the charging device (Fig. 1 shows output of LSQ) is connected to an energy reserve device (Fig. 1 shows CER is connected to output of LSQ) for storing an energy reserve for igniting the airbag (Fig. 1 shows CER i.e. energy reserve connected to triggering circuits for triggering airbags) [0034,0037], the method comprising:
applying a supply voltage to an input of the first voltage transformer (battery voltage UB is supplied to input of AW) [0034];
controlling the first voltage transformer, in a first start-up phase of the electronic circuit, such that the first voltage transformer outputs a first voltage value (Fig. 1 shows AW is being controlled to be in a first start-up phase to output a first voltage value VUP further shown in Fig. 4) [0040];
controlling the charging device, in a second start-up phase of the electronic circuit, such that the energy reserve device is brought to at least approximately 90% of the first voltage value (Fig. 4 shows LSQ charges energy reserve CER and is brought to at least approximately 90% of the voltage value VUP) [0033-34].
However, Sievers does not teach controlling the second voltage transformer, in a third start-up phase of the electronic circuit, such that a second voltage value that is higher than the first voltage value is present at the output of the second voltage transformer, and a third voltage value that is higher than the first voltage value is present at the output of the charging device.
However, Schumacher teaches controlling the second voltage transformer, in a third start-up phase of the electronic circuit, such that a second voltage value that is higher than the first voltage value is present at the output of the second voltage transformer (Fig. 1 shows output of second charge circuit 24A i.e. second voltage transformer VBup being more than 12V which is higher than VUP of the range 8V-10V i.e. first voltage value) [0024], and a third voltage value that is higher than the first voltage value is present at the output of the charging device (Fig. 1 shows first charge circuit 14 outputting reserve voltage VER of 33V i.e. third voltage which is greater than VUP of 8V-10V i.e. first voltage) [0022, 0024].
It would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have the second voltage transformer, in a third start-up phase of the electronic circuit, such that a second voltage value that is higher than the first voltage value is present at the output of the second voltage transformer, and a third voltage value that is higher than the first voltage value is present at the output of the charging device as taught by Schumacher in order to ensure that the ignition of the airbag system in the vehicle is receiving the required voltage necessary to deploy it efficiently in an emergency situation.
Regarding claim 2, Sievers does not teach wherein, in the first start-up phase of the electronic circuit, the charging device is disabled.
However, Schumacher teaches in the first start-up phase of the electronic circuit, the charging device is disabled (Fig. 1 shows first charge circuit 14 being activated or deactivated via control signal S.sub.CER) [0021].
It would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have in the first start-up phase of the electronic circuit, the charging device is disabled as taught by Schumacher in order to supply power efficiently to the ignition energy store to be deployed in an event of a crash.
Regarding claim 5, Sievers teaches wherein, in the second start-up phase of the electronic circuit, the charging device is controlled such that the energy reserve device is substantially fully charged within an interval that is less than or equal to a predefined maximum time value (CER is charged upto VER within an interval that is less than or equal to a predefined maximum time value) [0016, 0033, 0051].
Claim(s) 15, 17-18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 2013/0106179 (Sievers) in view of US 2024/0396358 (Schumacher).
Regarding claim 15, Sievers teaches a method for providing a voltage by way of an electronic circuit [0009-0010], wherein the electronic circuit is designed to ignite an airbag [0033-0034], wherein, in the electronic circuit, an output of a first voltage transformer [0033-0034], an output of the second voltage transformer (Fig. 1 shows output of DC1) is connected to an input of a charging device (Fig. 1 shows input of LSQ is connected to the output of DC1), an output of the charging device is connected to an energy reserve device (Fig. 1 shows output of DC1) is connected to an input of a charging device (Fig. 1 shows input of LSQ is connected to the output of DC1) for storing an energy reserve for igniting the airbag (Fig. 1 shows output of DC1) is connected to an input of a charging device (Fig. 1 shows input of LSQ is connected to the output of DC1), and the energy reserve device is connected to the input of the second voltage transformer via the autarchic switch (Fig. 1 shows CER connected to the input of DC 1 via switch) [0010, 0021, 0031].
However, Sievers does not teach wherein the method comprises the following steps: identifying whether a voltage that is present at an input of the first voltage transformer is below a predefined value; and if it has been identified that the voltage at the input of the first voltage transformer is below the predefined value, switching the autarchic switch to pass-through mode so that the energy reserve device is electrically connected to the input of the second voltage transformer, and disabling the charging device.
However, Schumacher teaches identifying whether a voltage that is present at an input of the first voltage transformer is below a predefined value [0028]; and if it has been identified that the voltage at the input of the first voltage transformer is below the predefined value [0028-0030, 0032], switching the autarchic switch to pass-through mode so that the energy reserve device is electrically connected to the input of the second voltage transformer, and disabling the charging device (Fig. 1 shows first charge circuit 14 being activated or deactivated via control signal S.sub.CER) [0021, 0033].
It would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have identifying whether a voltage that is present at an input of the first voltage transformer is below a predefined value; and if it has been identified that the voltage at the input of the first voltage transformer is below the predefined value, switching the autarchic switch to pass-through mode so that the energy reserve device is electrically connected to the input of the second voltage transformer, and disabling the charging device as taught by Schumacher in order to supply power efficiently to the ignition energy store to be deployed in an event of a crash.
Regarding claim 17, Sievers teaches wherein the energy reserve is brought to at least approximately 95% of the first voltage value (Fig. 4 shows LSQ charges energy reserve CER and is brought to at least approximately 95% of the voltage value VUP) [0033-34].
Regarding claim 18, Sievers teaches wherein the energy reserve is brought to at least approximately 99% of the first voltage value (Fig. 4 shows LSQ charges energy reserve CER and is brought to at least approximately 99% of the voltage value VUP) [0033-34].
Claim(s) 3, 6-7 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 2013/0106179 (Sievers) in view of US 2019/0161043 (Schumacher) further in view of US 2024/0396358 (Schumacher).
Regarding claim 3, Sievers and Schumacher does not teach wherein, in the second start-up phase of the electronic circuit, a current at the output of the charging device is regulated such that a power loss of the charging device does not exceed a predetermined first value.
However, Schumacher teaches wherein, in the second start-up phase of the electronic circuit, a current at the output of the charging device is regulated such that a power loss of the charging device does not exceed a predetermined first value [0013, 0029].
It would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have the second start-up phase of the electronic circuit, a current at the output of the charging device is regulated such that a power loss of the charging device does not exceed a predetermined first value as taught by Schumacher in order to ensure efficient power supply to the airbag system in a vehicle.
Regarding claim 6, Sievers and Schumacher does not teach wherein, in the third start-up phase, the charging device is controlled such that a power loss of the charging device does not exceed a predetermined second value.
However, Schumacher teaches wherein, in the third start-up phase, the charging device is controlled such that a power loss of the charging device does not exceed a predetermined second value [0011, 0013, 0029].
It would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have the third start-up phase, the charging device is controlled such that a power loss of the charging device does not exceed a predetermined second value as taught by Schumacher in order to ensure efficient power supply to the airbag system in a vehicle.
Regarding claim 7, Sievers and Schumacher does not teach wherein, the charging device is controlled such that current at the output of the charging device is dependent on a temperature of the electronic circuit and/or dependent on the temperature of the energy reserve device and/or dependent on the temperature of the charging device and/or dependent on the temperature of the first voltage transformer and/or dependent on the temperature of the second voltage transformer.
However, Schumacher teaches wherein, the charging device is controlled such that current at the output of the charging device is dependent on a temperature of the electronic circuit (Fig. 1 shows driver circuit 22 controlled such that current at the output of driver circuit 22 is dependent on a temperature of the circuit) [0029] and/or dependent on the temperature of the energy reserve device and/or dependent on the temperature of the charging device and/or dependent on the temperature of the first voltage transformer and/or dependent on the temperature of the second voltage transformer [0029-30].
It would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have the charging device is controlled such that current at the output of the charging device is dependent on a temperature of the electronic circuit and/or dependent on the temperature of the energy reserve device and/or dependent on the temperature of the charging device and/or dependent on the temperature of the first voltage transformer and/or dependent on the temperature of the second voltage transformer as taught by Schumacher in order to prevent overheating of the circuitry.
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)(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) 8-14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by US 2013/0106179 (Sievers).
Regarding claim 8, Sievers teaches an electronic circuit for igniting an airbag [0009-0010], wherein the electronic circuit [0033-0034] comprises: a first voltage transformer (Fig. 1 shows step-up converter AW), a second voltage transformer (Fig. 1 shows DC1) [0032], a charging device (Fig. 1 shows LSQ), an energy reserve device for storing an energy reserve for igniting the airbag (Fig. 1 shows CER i.e. energy reserve connected to triggering circuits for triggering airbags) [0034,0037], wherein an output of the first voltage transformer is connected to an input of the second voltage transformer (Fig. 1 shows input of DC1 connected to output of step-up converter AW) [0032], wherein an output of the second voltage transformer is connected to an input of the charging device (Fig. 1 shows input of LSQ is connected to the output of DC1), wherein an output of the charging device is connected to the energy reserve device (Fig. 1 shows CER is connected to output of LSQ), and wherein the energy reserve device is connected to the output of the first voltage transformer via an autarchic switch (Fig. 1 shows CER is connected to the output of AW via a switch) [0010, 0021, 0031, 0034].
Regarding claim 9, Sievers teaches wherein the output of the second voltage transformer is connected to an ignition device for the airbag [0031-32].
Regarding claim 10, Sievers teaches wherein the output of the first voltage transformer (Fig. 1 shows AW) is connected to a fourth voltage transformer (Fig. 1 shows DC2) for providing an external provision voltage (Fig. 1 shows DC 2 providing an external provision voltage) [0044].
Regarding claim 11, Sievers teaches wherein the output of the second voltage transformer is connected to a communication device for a motor vehicle (FIG. 1 shows DC1 connected to SPI i.e. communication device for vehicle) [0030].
Regarding claim 12, Sievers teaches wherein the output of the first voltage transformer is connected to a communication device for a motor vehicle (FIG. 1 shows AW connected to SPI i.e. communication device for vehicle) [0030].
Regarding claim 13, Sievers teaches: an airbag, and the electronic circuit for igniting the airbag according to claim 8 [0032].
Regarding claim 14, Sievers teaches motor vehicle comprising: the airbag system according to claim 13 [0006, 0032].
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 4, 16, 19-20 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 SWARNA N CHOWDHURI whose telephone number is (571)431-0696. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri 8am-5pm.
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, Rexford Barnie can be reached at 571-272-7496. 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.
SWARNA N. CHOWDHURI
Examiner
Art Unit 2836
/S.N.C/Examiner, Art Unit 2836
/REXFORD N BARNIE/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2836
Prosecution Insights