DETAILED ACTION
This office action is in response to the application filed on 07/29/2024. Claims 1-15 are pending.
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
Applicant’s claim for the benefit of a prior-filed application under 35 U.S.C. 119(e) or under 35 U.S.C. 120, 121, or 365(c) is acknowledged.
Receipt is acknowledged of papers submitted under 35 U.S.C. 119(a)-(d), which papers have been placed of record in the file.
Drawing
The drawing submitted on 07/29/2024 is acknowledged and accepted by the examiner.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statements (IDS) submitted on 07/29/2024 has been considered by the examiner.
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.
Claims 1-15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) and/or (a)(2) as being anticipated by Heckmann (US Patent or PG Pub. No. 20190357327, hereinafter ‘327).
Claim 1, 327 teaches a synchronous buck converter for supplying a LED load (e.g., 5, see Fig. 4-6) comprising: a high side switch and a low side switch connected in series (e.g., SO and SU respectively, see Fig. 4-6), an inductor (e.g., L or L200) connected to the midpoint of these switches, and a control circuitry (e.g., 3, 13-17) controlling the alternate switching operation of the two switches, wherein the switches are controlled such that there are time periods in which a negative current is flowing through said low side switch (e.g., when IL below zero, see Fig. 4), wherein the control circuitry is supplied with a feedback signal (SNS1)(e.g., the node connecting 14, 15, RS1, and RS2) indicating the level of the negative current (e.g., when sensed voltage of RS2 below zero) and is arranged to issue a switching-off command to the low side switch as soon as the feedback signal reaches or crosses a threshold value (e.g., Imin, see [0058], Fig. 4-6), wherein a least one feedback (e.g., the input of 13) from the LED load is fed back to the control circuitry, wherein the at least one feedback signal comprises at least one of LED voltage and LED current (e.g., see Fig. 5, 6), wherein the control circuitry is arranged to adapt its threshold value depending on the at least one feedback signal (e.g., see Fig. 5, 6).
Claim 2, ‘327 teaches the limitations of claim 1 as discussed above. It further teaches that wherein the adaptation is limited within a preset adaptation range (e.g., the range of the hysteresis comparator circuits of 14 and 15 further adapted to the output of 13, see Fig. 5-6).
Claim 3, ‘327 teaches the limitations of claim 1 as discussed above. It further teaches that wherein the adaptation of the threshold value is only performed in case there is a variation of the feedback back signal exceeding a preset hysteresis value (e.g., the range of the hysteresis comparator circuits of 14 and 15 further adapted to the output of 13, see Fig. 5-6, see Fig. 5-6).
Claim 4, ‘327 teaches the limitations of claim 1 as discussed above. It further teaches that wherein the adaptation is effected such that the negative current value at the time point where the switching-off command is actually performed by the low side switch is essentially constant even at varying LED voltage and/or LED current (e.g., the turn-off time of the lower transistor SU is specified at approximately −0.5 A choke current, see [0052], Fig. 5).
Claim 5, ‘327 teaches the limitations of claim 1 as discussed above. It further teaches that wherein the threshold value is the more reduced the higher the LED voltage (e.g., the lower Imin the higher the average inductor current output to the LED load, causing higher voltage drop across the LED load, see Fig. 4-5).
Claim 6, ‘327 teaches the limitations of claim 1 as discussed above. It further teaches that wherein the threshold value is the more reduced the higher the LED current (e.g., the lower Imin the higher the average inductor current output to the LED load, see Fig. 4-5).
Claim 7, ‘327 teaches the limitations of claim 1 as discussed above. It further teaches that, wherein the threshold value is adapted by deducing an LED current and/or LED voltage dependent adaptation value from a preset threshold value (e.g., when the output of 13 causing lower the average inductor current of choke L, the LED load current reduced, see [0052] [0053], Fig. 4-5).
Claim 8, ‘327 teaches the limitations of claim 1 as discussed above. It further teaches that wherein the threshold value is adapted only if the LED current exceeds a given LED current threshold value (e.g., The positive input of the second comparator 15, see [0052] [0053], Fig. 4-5).
Claim 9, ‘327 teaches the limitations of claim 1 as discussed above. It further teaches that wherein the threshold value is adapted in discrete time increments (e.g., the output of 13 being cycle by cycle adjusted), where a maximum adaptation step size is given (e.g., the desired mean current value being function of US, see [0057], Fig. 4-6).
Claim 10, ‘327 teaches the limitations of claim 1 as discussed above. It further teaches that the control circuitry comprises a plurality of ICs, such as e.g. an ASIC and a microcontroller (e.g., the microcontroller, see [0030][0037], Fig. 6).
Claim 11, ‘327 teaches the limitations of claim 10 as discussed above. It further teaches that wherein the adaptation of the threshold value is performed by the microcontroller communicating adapted threshold values to the ASIC and being supplied with one or more feedback signals indicating e.g. the LED current and/or the LED voltage (e.g., the microcontroller, see [0030][0037], Fig. 6).
Claim 12, ‘327 teaches the limitations of claim 1 as discussed above. It further teaches a LED lighting unit comprising a LED converter (e.g., the converter of Fig. 6) according to claim 1 and a LED load (e.g., 5) supplied by such converter.
For method claims 13-15, note that under MPEP 2112.02, the principles of inherency, if a prior art device, in its normal and usual operation, would necessarily perform the method claimed, then the method claimed will be considered to be anticipated by the prior art device. When the prior art device is the same as a device described in the specification for carrying out the claimed method, it can be assumed the device will inherently perform the claimed process. In re King, 801 F.2d 1324, 231 USPQ 136 (Fed. Cir. 1986). Therefore the previous rejections based on the apparatus will not be repeated.
Examiner's Note:
Examiner has cited particular columns and line numbers in the references applied to the claims above for the convenience of the applicant. Although the specified citations are representative of the teachings of the art and are applied to specific limitations within the individual claim, other passages and figures may apply as well. It is respectfully requested from the applicant in preparing responses, to fully consider the references in their entirety as potentially teaching all or part of the claimed invention, as well as the context of the passage as taught by the prior art or disclosed by the Examiner.
In the case of amending the claimed invention, Applicant is respectfully requested to indicate the portion(s) of the specification which dictate(s) the structure relied on for proper interpretation and also to verify and ascertain the metes and bounds of the claimed invention.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JUE ZHANG whose telephone number is (571)270-1263. The examiner can normally be reached on M-F: 8:30AM-5:00PM
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Monica Lewis can be reached on 571-272-2838. 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.
/JUE ZHANG/
Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2838