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 .
Drawings
The drawings are objected to because:
The overall quality of Figures 1-3 and 6 is not satisfactory.
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
Specification
The disclosure is objected to because of the following informalities:
Paragraph 0013 appears to have a typo; the paragraph ends with two periods “..”.
Appropriate correction is required.
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.
Claims 1-9 are 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.
Claim 1 is unclear:
The claim recites “the module” in line 5, it is not clear if applicant means the “power semiconductor module” as recited in lines 1-2 or a different module. Please clarify.
Similar rejection to the term “the module” in line 9, “the module” in line 11, “said module” in line 12, “the module” in line 15.
The term “the emitter/source” in line 6 lacks antecedent basis. This claim has not been previously recited in the claim.
The term “the gate” in line 6 lacks antecedent basis. This term has not been previously recited in the claim.
For examination on the merits the claim will be interpreted as best understood.
The term “strictly inferior” in claim 6 is a relative term which renders the claim indefinite. The term “strictly inferior” is not defined by the claim, the specification does not provide a standard for ascertaining the requisite degree, and one of ordinary skill in the art would not be reasonably apprised of the scope of the invention.
Claims 2-9 depend on claim 1, therefore, the claims are rejected at least for the same reasons as to claim 1.
For examination on the merits the claims will be interpreted as best understood.
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.
Claim 8 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to non-statutory subject matter. The claim(s) does/do not fall within at least one of the four categories of patent eligible subject matter because the claim is directed to ineligible software per se.
The claim recites “[c]omputer software comprising instructions to implement the method according to claim 1 when the software is executed by a processor”, without any positive recitation of hardware structure within the scope of the claimed system e.g. the code is [intended] “executed by a processor” to perform functions. Therefore, under the broadest reasonable interpretation, claim 8 is found to be directed to ineligible software per se (see MPEP 21.06.03(I)).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 1-7 and 9 would be allowable if rewritten or amended to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 2nd paragraph, set forth in this Office action.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
Regarding claim 1, Bandolero et al. “Selective Gate Driving in Intelligent Power Modules” teaches a measurement method for estimating temperatures of a power semiconductor module comprising a single Metal-Oxide-Semiconductor, a single Metal- insulator-Semiconductor or a set of Metal-Oxide-Semiconductors or Metal-insulator-Semiconductor paralleled connected, said method comprising: at least one first series of operations, during which the module is in a reference state, including
a. injecting a positive current Ig,ref (I meas) from the emitter/source to the gate of said module, an initial voltage V o,ref of the module, gate-emitter/source, being superior to a flatband voltage (see B. Gate-Sensitive Parameters, pages 901-902 and Figures 7-8).
b. measuring the voltage Vig,ref(t) across the current source (Vout) (see B. Gate-Sensitive Parameters, pages 901-902 and Fig. 7)
Bandolero et al. “On-line Virtual Junction Temperature Measurement via DC Gate Current injection” teaches injecting a current and measuring the voltage Vig,ref(t) across the current source (Vout) (see 2.2 Gate driver circuit, pages 424-425).
However, the closest prior art, alone or in combination fails to teach or render obvious the specific limitation of c. stop the current injection I g,ref when the voltage of the module becomes inferior to the flatband voltage - at least one second series of operations, during which the module is in a operational state, including d. injecting a positive current Ig,op from the emitter/source to the gate of said module, an initial voltage Vo,op of the module, gate-emitter/source, being superior to a flatband voltage e. measuring the voltage V ig,op(t) across the current source, f. stop the current injection I g,op when the voltage of the module becomes inferior to the flatband voltage then, at least one third series of operations including g. comparing the voltages V ig,ref(t) and V ig,op(t) measured respectively during one said first series and one said second series, h. deducing, from the comparison, a temperature dispersion T j,dev across the module, when combined with all the limitations also in claim 1.
Hence, the prior art of record fails to teach the invention as set forth in claims 1-7 and 9. The examiner cannot find teaching of the invention, nor reasons within the cited art to combine the elements of the references other than applicant's own reasoning to fully encompass the current pending claims.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JANICE M SOTO whose telephone number is (571)270-7707. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8:00am-4:00pm.
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, John Breene can be reached at 571-272-4107. 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.
/JANICE M SOTO/Examiner, Art Unit 2855
/JOHN E BREENE/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2855
Prosecution Insights