DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
1. The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
2. 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.
Title Objection
3. The title of the invention is not descriptive. A new title is required that is clearly indicative of the invention to which the claims are directed.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 101
35 U.S.C. 101 reads as follows:
Whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter, or any new and useful improvement thereof, may obtain a patent therefor, subject to the conditions and requirements of this title.
4. Claim 1-20 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to a judicial exception (i.e., a law of nature, a natural phenomenon, or an abstract idea) without significantly more.
5. Claim 1 is directed to “... monitor a rise in a voltage across the resistor with respect to time after the actuation of the switch; and determine whether liquid is present at the electronic port pin based on the monitoring”, which are mental-steps/mathematical-calculations that could also be performed by a general purpose processor. The additional elements “An electronic device, comprising: a resistor adapted to be coupled to an electronic port pin; a current source coupled to the resistor and adapted to be coupled to the electronic port pin; a switch coupled to the resistor and to the current source, the switch adapted to be coupled to the electronic port pin; and control logic coupled to the switch, the control logic configured to: actuate the switch ...” are merely insignificant extra-solution activity that include but is not limited to data acquisition and/or that is simply the result of the mathematical-calculations, which both simply include routine and conventional structures previously known to the pertinent industry that serve to generate the data to be processed by implementing the idea on a computer, and/or recitation of generic computer structure and also serve to perform generic computer functions that are well-understood routine, and conventional activities previously known to the pertinent industry.
Dependent claim 1 is Ineligible due to the following analysis:
5.1. Step 1 (Statutory Category): claim 1 is directed to an electronic device, therefore, it is directed to a statutory category, i.e., a machine (Step 1: YES).
5.2.1. Step 2A, Prong-1 (the claim is evaluated to determine whether it is directed to a judicial-exception/abstract-idea): claim 1 recites: “... monitor a rise in a voltage across the resistor with respect to time after the actuation of the switch; and determine whether liquid is present at the electronic port pin based on the monitoring”, which are mental-steps/mathematical-calculations. Therefore, it is directed to a judicial-exception/abstract-idea (Step 2A, Prong-1: YES).
5.2.2. Step 2A, Prong-2 (the claim is evaluated to determine whether the judicial-exception/abstract-idea is integrated into a Practical Application): claim 1 does not claim a particular machine, and do not claim any transformation of a particular article to a different state. Furthermore, it does not provide any particular context, thus, do not belong to a particular technological environment, industry or field of use. Consequently, the claimed judicial-exception/abstract-idea above are/is not integrated into a practical application and/or apply, rely on, or use to an additional element or elements in a manner that imposes a meaningful limit on the mental-steps/mathematical-calculations, thus, monopolizing the mental-steps/mathematical-calculations in a variety of technologies including but not limited to all different industries related to detecting water in electronics, using universal seral bus (USB), connectors, etc. (Step 2A, Prong-2: NO. There is no integration of said judicial-exception/abstract-idea into a practical application. The claim is just linking said judicial-exception/abstract-idea to the technological field relative to systems and a methods for detecting water in electronics).
5.3. Step 2B (the claim is evaluated to determine whether recites additional elements that amount to an inventive concept, or also, the additional elements are significantly more than the recited the judicial-exception/abstract-idea): claim 1 recites the additional element(s) “An electronic device, comprising: a resistor adapted to be coupled to an electronic port pin; a current source coupled to the resistor and adapted to be coupled to the electronic port pin; a switch coupled to the resistor and to the current source, the switch adapted to be coupled to the electronic port pin; and control logic coupled to the switch, the control logic configured to: actuate the switch ...”, which are/is simply routine and conventional activities that falls into a well-understood, routine, conventional activity and using well-understood, routine, conventional structure previously known, which includes but not limited to a microprocessor(s), sensors, and/or acquiring data that are insignificant extra solution activity (see the prior art references used in the rejections below, and prior art made of record below, and on the IDS and the prior art references used in the International Written Opinion dated 21 June 2024 for application PCT/US2025/034314, which was submitted via IDS). Therefore, the claim does not include additional element(s) significantly more, or, does not amount to more than the judicial-exception/abstract-idea itself and the claim is not patent eligible (Step 2B: NO).
6. Claim 2 depends on claim 1, therefore, it has the same abstract idea with the same routine and conventional structure described above in said claim(s).
In addition, claim 2 is further recites the element(s) “wherein the switch is a first switch and the resistor is coupled between a second switch and a ground terminal, the second switch coupled to the electronic port pin, the resistor, and the current source”, which are/is simply more mental-steps/mathematical-calculations, value numbers, extra solution activity(s), routine and/or conventional structure(s) previously known to the pertinent industry.
Furthermore, claim 2 does not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception because these/this limitation(s) are/is simply involve routine and conventional structures previously known to the pertinent industry that serve to generate the data to be processed by implementing the idea on a computer, and/or recitation of generic computer structure and also serve to perform generic computer functions that are well-understood routine, and conventional activities previously known to the pertinent industry.
7. Claim 3 depends on claim 1, therefore, it has the same abstract idea with the same routine and conventional structure described above in said claim(s).
In addition, claim 3 is further recites the element(s) “wherein the switch is coupled directly to a ground terminal”, which are/is simply more mental-steps/mathematical-calculations, value numbers, extra solution activity(s), routine and/or conventional structure(s) previously known to the pertinent industry.
Furthermore, claim 3 does not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception because these/this limitation(s) are/is simply involve routine and conventional structures previously known to the pertinent industry that serve to generate the data to be processed by implementing the idea on a computer, and/or recitation of generic computer structure and also serve to perform generic computer functions that are well-understood routine, and conventional activities previously known to the pertinent industry.
8. Claim 4 depends on claim 1, therefore, it has the same abstract idea with the same routine and conventional structure described above in said claim(s).
In addition, claim 4 is further recites the element(s) “an electronic port including the electronic port pin and coupled to the resistor, wherein the electronic port is a Universal Serial Bus USB port”, which are/is simply more mental-steps/mathematical-calculations, value numbers, extra solution activity(s), routine and/or conventional structure(s) previously known to the pertinent industry.
Furthermore, claim 4 does not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception because these/this limitation(s) are/is simply involve routine and conventional structures previously known to the pertinent industry that serve to generate the data to be processed by implementing the idea on a computer, and/or recitation of generic computer structure and also serve to perform generic computer functions that are well-understood routine, and conventional activities previously known to the pertinent industry.
9. Claim 5 depends on claim 1, therefore, it has the same abstract idea with the same routine and conventional structure described above in said claim(s).
In addition, claim 5 is further recites the element(s) “a comparator having a comparator output and first and second comparator inputs, the comparator output coupled to the control logic, the first comparator input coupled to the electronic port pin, the resistor, and the switch, the second comparator input configured to receive a reference voltage”, which are/is simply more mental-steps/mathematical-calculations, value numbers, extra solution activity(s), routine and/or conventional structure(s) previously known to the pertinent industry.
Furthermore, claim 5 does not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception because these/this limitation(s) are/is simply involve routine and conventional structures previously known to the pertinent industry that serve to generate the data to be processed by implementing the idea on a computer, and/or recitation of generic computer structure and also serve to perform generic computer functions that are well-understood routine, and conventional activities previously known to the pertinent industry.
10. Claim 6 depends on claim 5 that depends on claim 1, therefore, it has the same abstract idea with the same routine and conventional structure described above in said claim(s).
In addition, claim 6 is further recites the element(s) “wherein, to make the determination, the control logic is configured to measure a time between the actuation of the switch and the voltage reaching the reference voltage”, which are/is simply more mental-steps/mathematical-calculations, value numbers, extra solution activity(s), routine and/or conventional structure(s) previously known to the pertinent industry.
Furthermore, claim 6 does not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception because these/this limitation(s) are/is simply involve routine and conventional structures previously known to the pertinent industry that serve to generate the data to be processed by implementing the idea on a computer, and/or recitation of generic computer structure and also serve to perform generic computer functions that are well-understood routine, and conventional activities previously known to the pertinent industry.
11. Claim 7 depends on claim 6 that depends on claim 5 that depends on claim 1, therefore, it has the same abstract idea with the same routine and conventional structure described above in said claim(s).
In addition, claim 7 is further recites the element(s) “wherein the control logic is configured to determine whether the liquid is corrosive based on a comparison of the time to a time threshold”, which are/is simply more mental-steps/mathematical-calculations, value numbers, extra solution activity(s), routine and/or conventional structure(s) previously known to the pertinent industry.
Furthermore, claim 7 does not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception because these/this limitation(s) are/is simply involve routine and conventional structures previously known to the pertinent industry that serve to generate the data to be processed by implementing the idea on a computer, and/or recitation of generic computer structure and also serve to perform generic computer functions that are well-understood routine, and conventional activities previously known to the pertinent industry.
12. Claim 8 depends on claim 5 that depends on claim 1, therefore, it has the same abstract idea with the same routine and conventional structure described above in said claim(s).
In addition, claim 8 is further recites the element(s) “wherein the electronic port pin, the switch, the resistor, and the comparator are coupled to each other at a conductive member”, which are/is simply more mental-steps/mathematical-calculations, value numbers, extra solution activity(s), routine and/or conventional structure(s) previously known to the pertinent industry.
Furthermore, claim 8 does not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception because these/this limitation(s) are/is simply involve routine and conventional structures previously known to the pertinent industry that serve to generate the data to be processed by implementing the idea on a computer, and/or recitation of generic computer structure and also serve to perform generic computer functions that are well-understood routine, and conventional activities previously known to the pertinent industry.
13. Claim 9 is directed to “... determine whether the current is being shared between the electronic port pin and the resistor and to identify the presence of the liquid based on the determination”, which are mental-steps/mathematical-calculations that could also be performed by a general purpose processor. The additional elements “An electronic device, comprising: an electronic port pin; a resistor coupled to the electronic port pin; a current source coupled to the resistor and to the electronic port pin, the current source configured to provide a current to the resistor, the current shared between the resistor and the electronic port pin in the presence of liquid at the electronic port pin; and control logic configured ...” are merely insignificant extra-solution activity that include but is not limited to data acquisition and/or that is simply the result of the mathematical-calculations, which both simply include routine and conventional structures previously known to the pertinent industry that serve to generate the data to be processed by implementing the idea on a computer, and/or recitation of generic computer structure and also serve to perform generic computer functions that are well-understood routine, and conventional activities previously known to the pertinent industry.
Dependent claim 9 is Ineligible due to the following analysis:
13.1. Step 1 (Statutory Category): claim 9 is directed to an electronic device, therefore, it is directed to a statutory category, i.e., a machine (Step 1: YES).
13.2.1. Step 2A, Prong-1 (the claim is evaluated to determine whether it is directed to a judicial-exception/abstract-idea): claim 9 recites: “... determine whether the current is being shared between the electronic port pin and the resistor and to identify the presence of the liquid based on the determination”, which are mental-steps/mathematical-calculations. Therefore, it is directed to a judicial-exception/abstract-idea (Step 2A, Prong-1: YES).
13.2.2. Step 2A, Prong-2 (the claim is evaluated to determine whether the judicial-exception/abstract-idea is integrated into a Practical Application): claim 9 does not claim a particular machine, and do not claim any transformation of a particular article to a different state. Furthermore, it does not provide any particular context, thus, do not belong to a particular technological environment, industry or field of use. Consequently, the claimed judicial-exception/abstract-idea above are/is not integrated into a practical application and/or apply, rely on, or use to an additional element or elements in a manner that imposes a meaningful limit on the mental-steps/mathematical-calculations, thus, monopolizing the mental-steps/mathematical-calculations in a variety of technologies including but not limited to all different industries related to detecting water in electronics, using universal seral bus (USB), connectors, etc. (Step 2A, Prong-2: NO. There is no integration of said judicial-exception/abstract-idea into a practical application. The claim is just linking said judicial-exception/abstract-idea to the technological field relative to systems and a methods for detecting water in electronics).
13.3. Step 2B (the claim is evaluated to determine whether recites additional elements that amount to an inventive concept, or also, the additional elements are significantly more than the recited the judicial-exception/abstract-idea): claim 9 recites the additional element(s) “An electronic device, comprising: an electronic port pin; a resistor coupled to the electronic port pin; a current source coupled to the resistor and to the electronic port pin, the current source configured to provide a current to the resistor, the current shared between the resistor and the electronic port pin in the presence of liquid at the electronic port pin; and control logic configured ...”, which are/is simply routine and conventional activities that falls into a well-understood, routine, conventional activity and using well-understood, routine, conventional structure previously known, which includes but not limited to a microprocessor(s), sensors, and/or acquiring data that are insignificant extra solution activity (see the prior art references used in the rejections below, and prior art made of record below, and on the IDS and the prior art references used in the International Written Opinion dated 21 June 2024 for application PCT/US2025/034314, which was submitted via IDS). Therefore, the claim does not include additional element(s) significantly more, or, does not amount to more than the judicial-exception/abstract-idea itself and the claim is not patent eligible (Step 2B: NO).
14. Claim 10 depends on claim 9, therefore, it has the same abstract idea with the same routine and conventional structure described above in said claim(s).
In addition, claim 10 is further recites the element(s) “a first switch coupled between the current source and a conductive member and a second switch coupled between the resistor and the conductive member”, which are/is simply more mental-steps/mathematical-calculations, value numbers, extra solution activity(s), routine and/or conventional structure(s) previously known to the pertinent industry.
Furthermore, claim 10 does not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception because these/this limitation(s) are/is simply involve routine and conventional structures previously known to the pertinent industry that serve to generate the data to be processed by implementing the idea on a computer, and/or recitation of generic computer structure and also serve to perform generic computer functions that are well-understood routine, and conventional activities previously known to the pertinent industry.
15. Claim 11 depends on claim 10 that depends on claim 9, therefore, it has the same abstract idea with the same routine and conventional structure described above in said claim(s).
In addition, claim 11 is further recites the element(s) “a third switch coupled to the first and second switches, and to the electronic port pin, the third switch coupled directly to a ground terminal”, which are/is simply more mental-steps/mathematical-calculations, value numbers, extra solution activity(s), routine and/or conventional structure(s) previously known to the pertinent industry.
Furthermore, claim 11 does not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception because these/this limitation(s) are/is simply involve routine and conventional structures previously known to the pertinent industry that serve to generate the data to be processed by implementing the idea on a computer, and/or recitation of generic computer structure and also serve to perform generic computer functions that are well-understood routine, and conventional activities previously known to the pertinent industry.
16. Claim 12 depends on claim 10 that depends on claim 9, therefore, it has the same abstract idea with the same routine and conventional structure described above in said claim(s).
In addition, claim 12 is further recites the element(s) “wherein the electronic port pin is a CC pin of a Universal Serial Bus USB port, and wherein the control logic is configured to discard results of the determination based on a comparison of a voltage on the CC pin to a CC pin voltage range”, which are/is simply more mental-steps/mathematical-calculations, value numbers, extra solution activity(s), routine and/or conventional structure(s) previously known to the pertinent industry.
Furthermore, claim 12 does not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception because these/this limitation(s) are/is simply involve routine and conventional structures previously known to the pertinent industry that serve to generate the data to be processed by implementing the idea on a computer, and/or recitation of generic computer structure and also serve to perform generic computer functions that are well-understood routine, and conventional activities previously known to the pertinent industry.
17. Claim 13 depends on claim 9, therefore, it has the same abstract idea with the same routine and conventional structure described above in said claim(s).
In addition, claim 13 is further recites the element(s) “a comparator having a comparator output and first and second comparator inputs, the comparator output coupled to the control logic, the first comparator input coupled to the resistor, and the second comparator input configured to receive a threshold voltage”, which are/is simply more mental-steps/mathematical-calculations, value numbers, extra solution activity(s), routine and/or conventional structure(s) previously known to the pertinent industry.
Furthermore, claim 13 does not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception because these/this limitation(s) are/is simply involve routine and conventional structures previously known to the pertinent industry that serve to generate the data to be processed by implementing the idea on a computer, and/or recitation of generic computer structure and also serve to perform generic computer functions that are well-understood routine, and conventional activities previously known to the pertinent industry.
18. Claim 14 depends on claim 13 that depends on claim 9, therefore, it has the same abstract idea with the same routine and conventional structure described above in said claim(s).
In addition, claim 14 is further recites the element(s) “wherein the control logic is configured to make the determination based on a time in which a voltage across the resistor rises to the threshold voltage after the current is applied to the resistor”, which are/is simply more mental-steps/mathematical-calculations, value numbers, extra solution activity(s), routine and/or conventional structure(s) previously known to the pertinent industry.
Furthermore, claim 14 does not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception because these/this limitation(s) are/is simply involve routine and conventional structures previously known to the pertinent industry that serve to generate the data to be processed by implementing the idea on a computer, and/or recitation of generic computer structure and also serve to perform generic computer functions that are well-understood routine, and conventional activities previously known to the pertinent industry.
19. Claim 15 depends on claim 14 depends on claim 13 that depends on claim 9, therefore, it has the same abstract idea with the same routine and conventional structure described above in said claim(s).
In addition, claim 15 is further recites the element(s) “wherein the control logic is configured to determine whether the liquid is corrosive by comparing the time to a time threshold”, which are/is simply more mental-steps/mathematical-calculations, value numbers, extra solution activity(s), routine and/or conventional structure(s) previously known to the pertinent industry.
Furthermore, claim 15 does not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception because these/this limitation(s) are/is simply involve routine and conventional structures previously known to the pertinent industry that serve to generate the data to be processed by implementing the idea on a computer, and/or recitation of generic computer structure and also serve to perform generic computer functions that are well-understood routine, and conventional activities previously known to the pertinent industry.
20. Claim 16 is directed to “... monitoring ... a rise in a voltage across the resistor upon modifying the current pathway; comparing ... the rise in the voltage to normative data; and determining ... whether liquid is contacting the electronic port pin based on the comparison”, which are mental-steps/mathematical-calculations that could also be performed by a general purpose processor. The additional elements “A method, comprising: modifying a current pathway that is coupled to a current source, a resistor, and an electronic port pin; ... by a control logic ...” are merely insignificant extra-solution activity that include but is not limited to data acquisition and/or that is simply the result of the mathematical-calculations, which both simply include routine and conventional structures previously known to the pertinent industry that serve to generate the data to be processed by implementing the idea on a computer, and/or recitation of generic computer structure and also serve to perform generic computer functions that are well-understood routine, and conventional activities previously known to the pertinent industry.
Dependent claim 16 is Ineligible due to the following analysis:
20.1. Step 1 (Statutory Category): claim 16 is directed to a method, therefore, it is directed to a statutory category, i.e., a process (Step 1: YES).
20.2.1. Step 2A, Prong-1 (the claim is evaluated to determine whether it is directed to a judicial-exception/abstract-idea): claim 16 recites: “... monitoring ... a rise in a voltage across the resistor upon modifying the current pathway; comparing ... the rise in the voltage to normative data; and determining ... whether liquid is contacting the electronic port pin based on the comparison”, which are mental-steps/mathematical-calculations. Therefore, it is directed to a judicial-exception/abstract-idea (Step 2A, Prong-1: YES).
20.2.2. Step 2A, Prong-2 (the claim is evaluated to determine whether the judicial-exception/abstract-idea is integrated into a Practical Application): claim 16 does not claim a particular machine, and do not claim any transformation of a particular article to a different state. Furthermore, it does not provide any particular context, thus, do not belong to a particular technological environment, industry or field of use. Consequently, the claimed judicial-exception/abstract-idea above are/is not integrated into a practical application and/or apply, rely on, or use to an additional element or elements in a manner that imposes a meaningful limit on the mental-steps/mathematical-calculations, thus, monopolizing the mental-steps/mathematical-calculations in a variety of technologies including but not limited to all different industries related to detecting water in electronics, using universal seral bus (USB), connectors, etc. (Step 2A, Prong-2: NO. There is no integration of said judicial-exception/abstract-idea into a practical application. The claim is just linking said judicial-exception/abstract-idea to the technological field relative to systems and a methods for detecting water in electronics).
20.3. Step 2B (the claim is evaluated to determine whether recites additional elements that amount to an inventive concept, or also, the additional elements are significantly more than the recited the judicial-exception/abstract-idea): claim 16 recites the additional element(s) “A method, comprising: modifying a current pathway that is coupled to a current source, a resistor, and an electronic port pin; ... by a control logic ...”, which are/is simply routine and conventional activities that falls into a well-understood, routine, conventional activity and using well-understood, routine, conventional structure previously known, which includes but not limited to a microprocessor(s), sensors, and/or acquiring data that are insignificant extra solution activity (see the prior art references used in the rejections below, and prior art made of record below, and on the IDS and the prior art references used in the International Written Opinion dated 21 June 2024 for application PCT/US2025/034314, which was submitted via IDS). Therefore, the claim does not include additional element(s) significantly more, or, does not amount to more than the judicial-exception/abstract-idea itself and the claim is not patent eligible (Step 2B: NO).
21. Claim 17 depends on claim 16, therefore, it has the same abstract idea with the same routine and conventional structure described above in said claim(s).
In addition, claim 17 is further recites the element(s) “wherein modifying the current pathway includes opening a switch that is coupled to a ground terminal, to the current source, to the resistor, and to the electronic port pin”, which are/is simply more mental-steps/mathematical-calculations, value numbers, extra solution activity(s), routine and/or conventional structure(s) previously known to the pertinent industry.
Furthermore, claim 17 does not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception because these/this limitation(s) are/is simply involve routine and conventional structures previously known to the pertinent industry that serve to generate the data to be processed by implementing the idea on a computer, and/or recitation of generic computer structure and also serve to perform generic computer functions that are well-understood routine, and conventional activities previously known to the pertinent industry.
22. Claim 18 depends on claim 17 that depends on claim 16, therefore, it has the same abstract idea with the same routine and conventional structure described above in said claim(s).
In addition, claim 18 is further recites the element(s) “wherein the switch is coupled in parallel with the resistor, the switch and the resistor both coupled to the ground terminal”, which are/is simply more mental-steps/mathematical-calculations, value numbers, extra solution activity(s), routine and/or conventional structure(s) previously known to the pertinent industry.
Furthermore, claim 18 does not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception because these/this limitation(s) are/is simply involve routine and conventional structures previously known to the pertinent industry that serve to generate the data to be processed by implementing the idea on a computer, and/or recitation of generic computer structure and also serve to perform generic computer functions that are well-understood routine, and conventional activities previously known to the pertinent industry.
23. Claim 19 depends on claim 16, therefore, it has the same abstract idea with the same routine and conventional structure described above in said claim(s).
In addition, claim 19 is further recites the element(s) “wherein the monitoring comprises measuring an amount of time that elapses between the modification of the current pathway and the voltage exceeding a threshold voltage”, which are/is simply more mental-steps/mathematical-calculations, value numbers, extra solution activity(s), routine and/or conventional structure(s) previously known to the pertinent industry.
Furthermore, claim 19 does not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception because these/this limitation(s) are/is simply involve routine and conventional structures previously known to the pertinent industry that serve to generate the data to be processed by implementing the idea on a computer, and/or recitation of generic computer structure and also serve to perform generic computer functions that are well-understood routine, and conventional activities previously known to the pertinent industry.
24. Claim 20 depends on claim 19 that depends on claim 16, therefore, it has the same abstract idea with the same routine and conventional structure described above in said claim(s).
In addition, claim 20 is further recites the element(s) “wherein the determining comprises comparing the amount of time to a time threshold”, which are/is simply more mental-steps/mathematical-calculations, value numbers, extra solution activity(s), routine and/or conventional structure(s) previously known to the pertinent industry.
Furthermore, claim 20 does not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception because these/this limitation(s) are/is simply involve routine and conventional structures previously known to the pertinent industry that serve to generate the data to be processed by implementing the idea on a computer, and/or recitation of generic computer structure and also serve to perform generic computer functions that are well-understood routine, and conventional activities previously known to the pertinent industry.
Examiner’s Note
25. All the words in the language of the claims of which the specifications do not provide a definition in the form stated in the MPEP, the examiner has interpreted them by their plain meanings, pursuant to the MPEP 2111.01 “Plain Meaning” and MPEP 2173.01.
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.
26. Claim(s) 1, 2, 4, 9, 10, 12-14, 16, 17 and 19 are/is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) and 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Tyrrell et al. (Pub. No.: US 2020/0259298 hereinafter mentioned “Tyrrell”).
As per claim 1, Tyrrell, in the embodiment of Figs. 11A-11D that includes Fig. 4, discloses:
An electronic device (See MPEP 2111.02, Effect of Preamble, and II. Preamble Statements Reciting Purpose or Intended Use. However, see Figs. 4), comprising:
a resistor adapted to be coupled to an electronic port pin (Fig. 4A, see any of the resistor Rpa and/or Rda with the communication-connection CC1 pin of the connector cable arrangement 205a. Also see [0043]-[0045], [0058] and/or claims 1-3);
a current source coupled to the resistor and adapted to be coupled to the electronic port pin (Fig. 4A, see any of the current sources I1a and/or I2a with the communication-connection CC1 pin of the connector cable arrangement 205a. Also see [0043]-[0045], [0058] and/or claims 1-3);
a switch coupled to the resistor and to the current source (Fig. 4A, see any of the switches SW1a, SW2a and/or SW3a with any of any of the current sources I1a or I2a. Also see [0043]-[0045] and/or claims 1-3), the switch adapted to be coupled to the electronic port pin (Fig. 4A, see any of the switches SW1a, SW2a and/or SW3a with any of the non-shown connector pins of the connector cable arrangement 205a. Also see [0043]-[0045] and/or claims 1-3); and
control logic coupled to the switch (Fig. 4A, the control logic of the water-detect-controller 240 that generates the clocking signals with any of the switches SW1a, SW2a and/or SW3a. Also see [0056]-[0057] and/or claims 1-3),
the control logic configured to:
actuate the switch (see [0057] and/or claims 1-3);
monitor a rise in a voltage across the resistor (Figs. 5-8, see the voltage plots of the waveforms. Also see [0063]-[0064], [0056], [0058] and/or claims 1-3) with respect to time after the actuation of the switch (Fig. 4A, the control logic of the water-detect-controller 240 that generates the clocking signals with any of the switches SW1a, SW2a and/or SW3a. Also see [0056]-[0057] and/or claims 1-3); and
determine whether liquid is present at the electronic port pin based on the monitoring (see [0045], [0056], and/or [0058]).
As per claim 2, Tyrrell discloses the electronic device of claim 1 as described above.
Tyrrell further discloses:
wherein the switch is a first switch (Fig. 4A, see any of the switches SW1a, SW2a and/or SW3a with any of the non-shown connector pins of the connector cable arrangement 205a. Also see [0043]-[0045] and/or claims 1-3) and the resistor is coupled between a second switch and a ground terminal (Fig. 4A, see any of the resistor Rda with any the switches SW1a, SW2a. Also see [0043]-[0045], [0058] and/or claims 1-3), the second switch coupled to the electronic port pin, the resistor, and the current source (Fig. 4A, see any of the switches SW1a and/or SW2a couple to the resistor Rda and/or Rpa and any of the current sources I1a and/or I2a. Also see [0043]-[0045], [0058] and/or claims 1-3).
As per claim 4, Tyrrell discloses the electronic device of claim 1 as described above.
Tyrrell further discloses:
an electronic port including the electronic port pin and coupled to the resistor (Fig. 4A, see any of the resistor Rpa and/or Rda with the communication-connection CC1 pin of the connector cable arrangement 205a. Also see [0043]-[0045], [0058] and/or claims 1-3), wherein the electronic port is a Universal Serial Bus USB port (see [0043] and/or [0086]).
As per claim 9, Tyrrell, in the embodiment of Figs. 11A-11D that includes Fig. 4, discloses:
An electronic device (See MPEP 2111.02, Effect of Preamble, and II. Preamble Statements Reciting Purpose or Intended Use. However, see Figs. 4), comprising:
an electronic port pin (Fig. 4A, see the communication-connection CC1 pin of the connector cable arrangement 205a. Also see [0043]-[0045], [0058] and/or claims 1-3);
a resistor coupled to the electronic port pin (Fig. 4A, see any of the resistor Rpa and/or Rda with the communication-connection CC1 pin. Also see [0043]-[0045], [0058] and/or claims 1-3);
a current source coupled to the resistor and to the electronic port pin, the current source configured to provide a current to the resistor (Fig. 4A, see any of the current sources I1a and/or I2a with the communication-connection CC1 pin of the connector cable arrangement 205a, the resistor Rpa and/or Rda and the switches SW1a, SW2a and/or SW3a. Also see [0043]-[0045], [0058] and/or claims 1-3), the current shared between the resistor and the electronic port pin in the presence of liquid at the electronic port pin (Fig. 4A, see any of the resistor Rpa and/or Rda with the communication-connection CC1 pin. Also see [0045], [0058] and/or claims 1-3); and
control logic (Fig. 4A, the control logic of the water-detect-controller 240 that generates the clocking signals with any of the switches SW1a, SW2a and/or SW3a. Also see [0056]-[0057] and/or claims 1-3) configured to determine whether the current is being shared between the electronic port pin and the resistor and to identify the presence of the liquid based on the determination (see [0045], [0056], and/or [0058]).
As per claim 10, Tyrrell discloses the electronic device of claim 9 as described above.
Tyrrell further discloses:
a first switch coupled between the current source and a conductive member (Fig. 4A, see any of the switches SW1a, and/or SW2a with their respective current sources I1a and/or I2a and conductive-member/line/wiring connecting the communication-connection CC1 pin . Also see [0056]-[0057] and/or claims 1-3) and a second switch coupled between the resistor and the conductive member (Fig. 4A, see the switch SW3a and resistor 3a with the conductive-member/line/wiring connecting the communication-connection CC1 pin. Also see [0056]-[0057] and/or claims 1-3).
Furthermore, pursuant to MPEP 2144.04 Legal Precedent as Source of Supporting Rationale, VI. REVERSAL, DUPLICATION, OR REARRANGEMENT OF PARTS, the Rearranging/shifting the position of the components such as resistors, switches, control logics with respect to each other does not modify the operation of the electronic device in a novel manner, therefore, components’ positions and/or rearrangement has no patentable weight (see “In re Japikse, 181 F.2d 1019, 86 USPQ 70 (CCPA 1950)). Additionally, rearranging the component positions is an obvious design choice (see “In re Kuhle, 526 F.2d 553, 188 USPQ 7 (CCPA 1975)). Furthermore, if the aforesaid arrangements modify the sensor in an unpredictable manner, it should be added language claiming the aforesaid unpredictable manner in order to add patentability weight to the claim.
As per claim 12, Tyrrell discloses the electronic device of claim 10 as described above.
Tyrrell further discloses:
wherein the electronic port pin is a CC pin of a Universal Serial Bus USB port (see [0043] and/or [0086]), and wherein the control logic is configured to discard results of the determination based on a comparison of a voltage on the CC pin to a CC pin voltage range (Figs. 5 and 7-9, the implicit unit that compares the inputs to the thresholds-voltage/reference-voltage of the water-detect-controller 240 of Fig. 4A, which is connected to the communication-connection CC1 pin, the resistor Rpa and/or Rda and the switches SW1a, SW2a and/or SW3a. Also see [0060] and/or [0086]).
As per claim 13, discloses the electronic device of claim 9 as described above.
Tyrrell further discloses:
a comparator having a comparator output and first and second comparator inputs, the comparator output coupled to the control logic, the first comparator input coupled to the resistor, and the second comparator input configured to receive a threshold voltage (Figs. 5 and 7-9, the implicit unit that compares the inputs to the thresholds-voltage/reference-voltage of the water-detect-controller 240 of Fig. 4A, which is connected to the communication-connection CC1 pin, the resistor Rpa and/or Rda and the switches SW1a, SW2a and/or SW3a. Also see [0060] and/or [0086]).
As per claim 14, discloses the electronic device of claim 13 as described above.
Tyrrell further discloses:
wherein the control logic (Fig. 4A, the control logic of the water-detect-controller 240 that generates the clocking signals with any of the switches SW1a, SW2a and/or SW3a. Also see [0056]-[0057] and/or claims 1-3) is configured to make the determination based on a time in which a voltage across the resistor rises (Figs. 5-8, see the voltage plots of the waveforms. Also see [0056], [0058] and/or claims 1-3) to the threshold voltage after the current is applied to the resistor (Figs. 5-8, see Vcc1 and/or Vcc2 measurements over time while switches are actuated until reaching or being greater than threshold-voltage VWD_THRESH. Also see [0063]-[0064]).
As per claim 16, Tyrrell, in the embodiment of Figs. 11A-11D that includes Fig. 4, discloses:
A method (See MPEP 2111.02, Effect of Preamble, and II. Preamble Statements Reciting Purpose or Intended Use. However, see Figs. 11), comprising:
modifying a current pathway that is coupled to a current source (Fig. 4A, see any of the switches SW1a, SW2a and/or SW3a that modify the current pathway with any of any of the current sources I1a or I2a. Also see [0043]-[0045] and/or claims 1-3), a resistor, and an electronic port pin (Fig. 4A, see any of the current sources I1a and/or I2a with the communication-connection CC1 pin of the connector cable arrangement 205a. Also see [0043]-[0045], [0058] and/or claims 1-3);
monitoring, by a control logic (Fig. 4A, the control logic of the water-detect-controller 240 that generates the clocking signals with any of the switches SW1a, SW2a and/or SW3a. Also see [0056]-[0057] and/or claims 1-3), a rise in a voltage across the resistor (Figs. 5-8, see the voltage plots of the waveforms. Also see [0063]-[0064], [0056], [0058] and/or claims 1-3) upon modifying the current pathway (Fig. 4A, see any of the switches SW1a, SW2a and/or SW3a that modify the current pathway with any of any of the current sources I1a or I2a. Also see [0043]-[0045] and/or claims 1-3);
comparing, by the control logic, the rise in the voltage to normative data (Figs. 5 and 7-9, the implicit unit that compares the inputs to the thresholds-voltage/normative-data of the water-detect-controller 240 of Fig. 4A, which is connected to the communication-connection CC1 pin, the resistor Rpa and/or Rda and the switches SW1a, SW2a and/or SW3a. Also see [0060] and/or [0086]); and
determining, by the control logic, whether liquid is contacting the electronic port pin based on the comparison (see [0045], [0056], and/or [0058]).
As per claim 17, Tyrrell discloses the method of claim 16 as described above.
Tyrrell further discloses:
wherein modifying the current pathway includes opening a switch that is coupled to a ground terminal, to the current source, to the resistor, and to the electronic port pin (Fig. 4A, see any of the switches SW1a, SW2a and/or SW3a that modify the current pathway with any of any of the current sources I1a or I2a, the resistor Rpa and/or Rda and communication-connection CC1 pin. Also see [0043]-[0045], [0058] and/or claims 1-3).
As per claim 19, Tyrrell discloses the method of claim 16 as described above.
Tyrrell further discloses:
wherein the monitoring comprises measuring an amount of time that elapses between the modification of the current pathway and the voltage exceeding a threshold voltage (Figs. 5-8, see Vcc1 and/or Vcc2 measurements over time while switches are actuated until reaching or being greater than threshold-voltage VWD_THRESH. Also see [0058]-[0064]).
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 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.
27. Claim(s) 3, 5, 6, 8, 11 and 18 are/is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tyrrell.
As per claim 3, Tyrrell discloses the electronic device of claim 1 as described above.
Tyrrell discloses the switch being coupled to a ground terminal but does not explicitly disclose that said switch is directly to the ground terminal.
However, a switch directly connected to a ground terminal has no patentable weigh and could be an obvious design choice.
As per claim 5, Tyrrell discloses the electronic device of claim 1 as described above.
Tyrrell further discloses:
a comparator having a comparator output and first and second comparator inputs, the comparator output coupled to the control logic, the first comparator input coupled to the electronic port pin, the resistor, and the switch, the second comparator input configured to receive a reference voltage (Figs. 5 and 7-9, the implicit unit that compares the inputs to the thresholds-voltage/reference-voltage of the water-detect-controller 240 of Fig. 4A, which is connected to the communication-connection CC1 pin, the resistor Rpa and/or Rda and the switches SW1a, SW2a and/or SW3a. Also see [0060] and/or [0086]).
Furthermore, pursuant to MPEP 2144.04 Legal Precedent as Source of Supporting Rationale, VI. REVERSAL, DUPLICATION, OR REARRANGEMENT OF PARTS, the Rearranging/shifting the position of the components such as resistors, switches, control logics with respect to each other does not modify the operation of the electronic device in a novel manner, therefore, components’ positions and/or rearrangement has no patentable weight (see “In re Japikse, 181 F.2d 1019, 86 USPQ 70 (CCPA 1950)). Additionally, rearranging the component positions is an obvious design choice (see “In re Kuhle, 526 F.2d 553, 188 USPQ 7 (CCPA 1975)). Furthermore, if the aforesaid arrangements modify the device(s) in an unpredictable manner, it should be added language claiming the aforesaid unpredictable manner in order to add patentability weight to the claim.
As per claim 6, Tyrrell discloses the electronic device of claim 5 as described above.
Tyrrell further discloses:
wherein, to make the determination, the control logic (Fig. 4A, the control logic of the water-detect-controller 240 that generates the clocking signals with any of the switches SW1a, SW2a and/or SW3a. Also see [0056]-[0057] and/or claims 1-3) is configured to measure a time between the actuation of the switch (Figs. 5-8, see Vcc1 and/or Vcc2 measurements over time while switches are actuated until reaching or being greater than threshold-voltage VWD_THRESH. Also see [0058]-[0064]) and the voltage reaching the reference voltage (Fig. 11B, see box 528 in which the voltages Vcc1 are measured at least until reaching the threshold-voltage VWD_THRESH. Also see [0082]).
As per claim 8, Tyrrell discloses the electronic device of claim 5 as described above.
Tyrrell further discloses:
wherein the electronic port pin, the switch, the resistor, and the comparator are coupled to each other at a conductive member (Fig. 4A, see the conductive-member/line/wiring connecting the communication-connection CC1 pin, the resistor Rpa and/or Rda and the switches SW1a, SW2a and/or SW3a to the water-detect-controller 240 that has an implicit unit that performs comparisons/comparator. Also see [0043]-[0045], [0057] and/or [0060]).
As per claim 11, Tyrrell discloses the electronic device of claim 10 as described above.
Tyrrell discloses a third switch coupled to the first and second switches, and to the electronic port pin the third switch being coupled to a ground terminal as described above but does not explicitly disclose that said third switch is directly to the ground terminal.
However, a switch directly connected to a ground terminal has no patentable weigh and could be an obvious design choice.
As per claim 18, Tyrrell discloses the method of claim 17 as described above.
Tyrrell discloses a switch connected to the resistor and both coupled to the ground terminal as described above but does disclose that said switch is coupled in parallel with said resistor
However, pursuant to MPEP 2144.04 Legal Precedent as Source of Supporting Rationale, VI. REVERSAL, DUPLICATION, OR REARRANGEMENT OF PARTS, the Rearranging/shifting the position of the components of a device, which require different connection, with respect to the other components does not modify the operation of the sensor in a novel manner, therefore, components’ positions and/or rearrangement has no patentable weight (see “In re Japikse, 181 F.2d 1019, 86 USPQ 70 (CCPA 1950)). Additionally, rearranging the component positions is an obvious design choice (see “In re Kuhle, 526 F.2d 553, 188 USPQ 7 (CCPA 1975)). Furthermore, if the aforesaid arrangements modify the device(s) in an unpredictable manner, it should be added language claiming the aforesaid unpredictable manner in order to add patentability weight to the claim.
28. The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
a) Gupta (Pub. No.: US 2018/0088067) teaches “Methods, structures, and apparatus that are able to detect the presence of a connection to a contact of an electronic device and are also able to detect the presence of contamination at the contact” (Abstract).
b) Bacon (Pub. No.: US 2017/0358922) teaches “A voltage of a first pin that is one of several pins of an external connector of a system is measured, while the first pin is un-driven except for being pulled to ground through a first resistance, and a second pin of the external connector is being used as a power supply rail of the system. The measured voltage is compared to a short circuit threshold and in response to that threshold being exceeded, the power supply voltage on the second pin is reduced” (Abstract).
c) Mullins (Pub. No.: US 2014/0162496) teaches “An electronic device may include a connector port that accommodates reversible connector plugs. The connector port may include protection circuitry that protects other components in the electronic device from undesired power supply voltages. The protection circuitry may form a first branch and a second branch opposite to the first branch” (Abstract).
d) Oomura (Pub. No.: US 2005/0237353) teaches “a liquid discharge head capable of improving the durability and stability of a heating resistor and a liquid discharge head in its turn without making the shape of the region of the heating resistor complex. The liquid discharge head has a heater resistor RH for heating the liquid in a liquid route (not illustrated) communicating with a discharge port (not illustrated) and generating bubbles and a switch circuit SW for switching on/off of the current to be supplied to a heater resistor RH. One end of the heater resistor RH is connected to a power-supply potential VH, one end of the switch circuit SW is connected to a ground potential GNDH and the other end of the heater resistor RH and the other end of the switch circuit SW are mutually connected” (Abstract).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ALVARO E. FORTICH whose telephone number is (571) 272-0944. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday thru Friday from 8:30am to 5:30pm.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner's supervisor, Huy Phan, can be reached on (571)272-7924. 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 http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. 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.
/ALVARO E FORTICH/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2858