DETAILED ACTION
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 § 102
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 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.
Claim(s) 19 and 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Williams et al (US Patent 6590440).
Regarding claim 19, Figure 6 of Williams discloses a method comprising:
receiving a first voltage at a first current terminal [T3] of a bidirectional switch [S6]
receiving a second voltage at a second current terminal or a substrate bias terminal of the bidirectional switch [T4]
responsive to the first voltage lower than the second voltage, connecting the first current terminal to the substrate bias terminal [M2 and M3; column 8 lines 25-55]
responsive to the second voltage lower than the first voltage, connecting the second current terminal to the substrate bias terminal [M2 and M3; column 8 lines 25-55]
Regarding claim 20, Figure 6 of Williams discloses responsive to the first and second voltages being equal, connecting one of the first or second current terminals to the substrate bias terminal [M4 and M5; column 8 lines 25-55].
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 and 15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Williams et al (US Patent 6590440).
Regarding claim 1, Figure 6 of Williams discloses an apparatus comprising:
a bidirectional switch substrate bias circuit comprising a first switch coupled between a substrate bias terminal and a first switch current terminal, the first switch having a first switch control terminal [M2]
a second switch coupled between the substrate bias terminal and a second switch current terminal, the second switch having a second switch control terminal [M3]
Williams does not explicitly disclose a control circuit having first and second inputs and first and second outputs, the first and second inputs coupled to the respective first and second switch current terminals, and the first and second outputs coupled to the respective first and second switch control terminals, the control circuit configured to, responsive to respective states of the first and second inputs, enable one of the first or second switches and disable the other one of the first or second switches.
However, it would have been obvious to of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the circuit of Williams by using a control circuit as a matter of simple design-choice, since it was well-known in the art to replace hard-wired control inputs/outputs with control circuits to allow to increased flexibility and routing options.
Regarding claim 15, Figure 6 of Williams discloses an apparatus comprising:
a first bidirectional switch having a first current terminal and a second current terminal
the second current terminal coupled to a first switching terminal
the first bidirectional switch having a first substrate bias terminal
a first substrate bias circuit including a first switch coupled between the first current terminal and the first substrate bias terminal, the first switch having a first switch control terminal
a second switch coupled between the second current terminal and the first substrate bias terminal, the second switch having a second switch control terminal
Williams does not explicitly disclose
the first current terminal coupled to an alternating current (AC) terminal
a second bidirectional switch having a third current terminal and a fourth current terminal
the third current terminal coupled to the AC terminal
the fourth current terminal coupled to a second switching terminal
the second bidirectional switch having a second substrate bias terminal
a first control circuit having first and second inputs and first and second outputs, the first and second inputs coupled to the respective first and second current terminals, and the first and second outputs coupled to the respective first and second switch control terminals, the first control circuit configured to, responsive to respective states of the first and second inputs, enable one of the first or second switches and disable the other one of the first or second switches
a second substrate bias circuit including a third switch coupled between the third current terminal and the second substrate bias terminal, the third switch having a third switch control terminal
a fourth switch coupled between the fourth current terminal and the second substrate bias terminal, the fourth switch having a fourth switch control terminal
a second control circuit having third and fourth inputs and third and fourth outputs, the third and fourth inputs coupled to the respective third and fourth current terminals, and the third and second outputs coupled to the respective first and second switch control terminals, the second control circuit configured to, responsive to respective states of the third and fourth inputs, enable one of the third or fourth switches and disable the other one of the third or fourth switches
However, it would have been obvious to of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the circuit of Williams by using a control circuit as a matter of simple design-choice, since it was well-known in the art to replace hard-wired control inputs/outputs with control circuits to allow to increased flexibility and routing options.
Additionally, it would have been obvious to of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the circuit of Williams, as applied above, by using a second switch for the purpose of implementing the circuit in an AC system, since it was well-known in the art to use two switches to convert a system from DC to AC and would have been a matter of applying a known technique to a known device ready for improvement to yield predictable results.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 2-14 and 16-18 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 Tomi S Skibinski whose telephone number is (571)270-7581. The examiner can normally be reached Mon. - Thurs. 8am - 6pm.
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, Regis Betsch can be reached at (571)270-7101. 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.
/TOMI SKIBINSKI/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2842
Prosecution Insights