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
Acknowledgment is made of applicant's claim for foreign priority based on an application filed in FRANCE on 08/29/2023. It is noted, however, that applicant has not filed a certified copy of the 2309057 application as required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 08/22/2024. The submission is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Specification
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. Note that “NFC” does not appear described what the concept of the invention.
Claim Objections
Claim 16 is objected to because of the following informalities:
In Claim 16, the recitations of “NFC” type, where NFC needs to expand because the NFC does not appear represent any meaning. It is noted that paragraph 2 of the application discloses Near Field Communication (NFC) protocol.
Appropriate correction is required.
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.
Claim(s) 1-4 & 15-17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Nishimura et al. (US 7809285 B2, hereinafter, Nishimura).
Regarding claim 1:
Nishimura discloses in Figs. 13, an amplification circuit, comprising: an amplifier circuit(3) including an operational amplifier (amplifier 2), said amplifier circuit configured to amplify a signal to be demodulated; and a feedback loop (Fig. 20, amplifier 3, feedback resistor R1 and R2a and switch SW2a) having a resistance value discretely varying according to a level of an output node of said amplifier circuit with respect to one or a plurality of thresholds defining one or a plurality of out-of-saturation operating ranges of the amplifier circuit (see Fig. 13, comparators 4 and 16); and (Claims 15 & 16), the amplification circuit of Nishimura suitable to be used in a demodulation circuit (see Col. 20, data communication) and it is noted that no specific the demodulation circuit is defined by the applicant); and wherein the demodulation circuit may be used in NFC Near Field Communication (NFC) type and (Claim 17) near-field communication device comprising the demodulation circuit according to claim 15 (see reference for instance, US 20120119808 A1).
Regarding claim 2:
Nishimura discloses wherein the resistance value of the feedback loop (Figs. 13, 20, Feedback loop) of the amplifier circuit is controlled to have a first resistance value when said level is higher than a first threshold (reference VB1) or when said level is lower than a second threshold (VB2), where the second threshold is lower than the first threshold.
Regarding claim 3:
Nishimura discloses wherein the resistance value of the feedback loop of the amplifier circuit is controlled to have a second resistance value when said level is between the first threshold (VB1) and the second threshold (VB2).
Regarding claim 4:
Nishimura discloses wherein the resistance value of the feedback loop (Figs. 13, 20, circuit 3) of the amplifier circuit is controlled (by control circuit 5) to have a third resistance value when said level is higher than a third threshold (not shown, see Fig. 20, plurality feedback, which similarly to the applicant Fig. 6), wherein the third threshold is higher than the first threshold, or when said level is lower than a fourth threshold (not shown, see Fig. 20, plural feedback), wherein the fourth threshold is lower than the second threshold.
Claim(s) 18 & 19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by YANAGISAWA (JP 2000315923 A, of record).
Regarding claim 18:
YANAGISAWA discloses in Figs. 7, an amplification circuit, comprising:
an amplifier circuit (2) configured to amplify a signal to be demodulated; and
a feedback loop (resistors R1, R2, R3, R4, R5) coupled between and input node (In) and output node (Vout) of the amplifier circuit; wherein the feedback loop has a resistance value discretely varying according to a level at the output node of said amplifier circuit with respect to one or a plurality of thresholds (V1, V2, V3) defining one or a plurality of out-of-saturation operating ranges of the amplifier circuit; wherein the resistance value of the feedback loop of the amplifier circuit is controlled to have a first resistance value when said level is higher than a first threshold (V1) or when said level is lower than a second threshold, where the second threshold (V2) is lower than the first threshold; and wherein said feedback loop comprises:
a first branch (R1) coupling the input node of the amplifier circuit to the output node, said first branch including a resistive element (R1) having a first resistance value; N additional branches (R3-R5) coupled in parallel with the first branch, wherein each additional branch includes a resistive element (R3- R5) in series with a switch (TR1, TR2, TR3) controlled by a respective control signal, N being a positive integer greater than two; said respective control signal (signals from circuit 5-8 and comparators 3, 4, 7) being dependent on a comparison between the level of the output node of said amplifier circuit with respect to a respective operating range from among N out-of-saturation operating ranges of the amplifier circuit, each operating range being defined by thresholds; and N comparison circuits (comparators 3, 4, 7) configured to generate a respective control signal for each of the N additional branches to make the respective switch: non-conductive when the level of the output node of the amplifier circuit is in the respective operating range; and conductive when the level of the output node of the amplifier circuit is outside of said respective operating range.
Regarding claim 19:
YANAGISAWA discloses in Figs. 7, wherein the resistance value of the feedback loop of the amplifier circuit (2) is controlled to have a second resistance value when said level is between the first threshold (V1) and the second threshold (V2).
Claim(s) 1 & 5 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Hayakawa (US 20060087378 A1, of record).
Regarding claim 1:
Hayakawa discloses in Figs. 2a, an amplification circuit, comprising: an amplifier circuit including an operational amplifier (amplifier OP1), said amplifier circuit configured to amplify a signal to be demodulated; and a feedback loop (OP1, feedback resistor R1 and R2 and SW) having a resistance value discretely varying according to a level of an output node of said amplifier circuit with respect to one or a plurality of thresholds (comparator 12 with reference 13) defining one or a plurality of out-of-saturation operating ranges of the amplifier circuit.
Regarding claim 5:
Hayakawa discloses wherein the operational amplifier (OP1) comprises an inverting input (negative terminal) coupled to an input node (a node between PD and resistor R3) of the amplifier circuit and coupled to the output node of the amplifier circuit via the feedback loop (as shown in Fig. 2a).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 6-14 & 20-21are 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.
Claims 6-14 are allowable since the closest prior art does not disclose about wherein said feedback loop comprises: a first branch coupling the inverting input of the operational amplifier to the output node, said first branch including a resistive element having a first resistance value; N additional branches coupled in parallel with the first branch, wherein each additional branch includes a resistive element in series with a switch controlled by a respective control signal, N being a positive integer; said respective control signal being dependent on a comparison between the level of the output node of said amplifier circuit with respect to a respective operating range from among N out-of-saturation operating ranges of the amplifier circuit, each operating range being defined by thresholds; and N comparison circuits configured to generate a respective control signal for each of the N additional branches to make the respective switch: non-conductive when the level of the output node of the amplifier circuit is in the respective operating range; and conductive when the level of the output node of the amplifier circuit is outside of said respective operating range.
Claim 14 is allowable since the closest prior art does not disclose about wherein the inverting input of the operational amplifier is coupled to the input node of the amplifier circuit via a capacitive element in series with an input resistor.
Claims 20-21 are allowable since the closest prior art does not disclose about wherein the resistance value of the feedback loop of the amplifier circuit is controlled to have a third resistance value when said level is higher than a third threshold, wherein the third threshold is higher than the first threshold, or when said level is lower than a fourth threshold, wherein the fourth threshold is lower than the second threshold.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to KHIEM D NGUYEN whose telephone number is (571)270-3941. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri 8:00 AM-5:00 PM EST.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Jessica Han can be reached at (571) 272-2078. 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.
/KHIEM D NGUYEN/Examiner, Art Unit 2843
Prosecution Insights