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 .
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election without traverse of Specie I (Figure 1) in the reply filed on 01/20/26 is acknowledged.
Applicant indicates that claims 1-9 and 14 are readable on the elected Specie I (Figure 1), and claims 10-13 of non-elected Specie(s) have been withdrawn.
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 and 14 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.
For claim 1, the recitation “a gate drive device that operates on two sides, a high side and a low side, and drives a gate of a power transistor” on lines 1-2 is indefinite because it is not clear what applicant means by “on two sides, a high side and a low side” and it is not clear if the above phrase means a gate drive device comprising a high side device and a low side device and if it is, then it is not known how the high side and low side are connected to drive a gate of a power transistor. Further, the recitation “a control device provided in pair to constitute the two sides, and configured to output a switching signal … according to a received control signal” on lines 3-5 is indefinite because it is not clear what applicant means by “a control device provided in pair to constitute the two sides” and it is not clear if it means if a control device comprising a high side control device and a low side device, and if it is, then it is not clear how are they connected, and which side(s) of the control device receive a control signal and outputs a switching signal. Further, the recitation “a switching element provided in pair corresponding to the control device, and configured to output, to the gate of the power transistor, a voltage corresponding to a level of the switching signal received from the control device” on lines 7-9 is indefinite because it is not clear what applicant means by “a switching element provided in pair corresponding to the control device” and how the pair connected with each other and with other elements in the claim; and it is also not clear which one of the pair outputs “a voltage” as recited in the claim. Thus, the metes and bounds of the claim cannot be determined renders the claim indefinite. Clarification and/or appropriate correction is required.
Claims 2-9 are indefinite because they depend on claim 1.
Also, for claim 2, the recitations “wherein the switching element is a MOSFET” (line 2) and “a gate of the switching element” (line 4) cause the claim to be indefinite because it is not clear why the claim earlier recited “a switching element provided in pair” (see claim 1, line 7) and now recites “wherein the switching element is a MOSFET” (line 2) and “a gate of the switching element” (line 4), so it is not clear which one of the pair of the switching device that applicant refers to. Clarification and/or appropriate correction is required.
Also, for claim 3, the recitations “wherein the switching element is a MOSFET” (line 2) and “a gate voltage of the switching element” (line 3) cause the claim to be indefinite for the similar reasons as discussed in claim 2, i.e., it is not clear which one of the pair of the switching device that applicant refers to. Clarification and/or appropriate correction is required.
Also, for claim 4, the recitations “wherein the switching element is a bipolar transistor” (line 2) and “a gate current of the switching element” (line 3) cause the claim to be indefinite for the similar reasons as discussed in claim 2, it is not clear which one of the pair of the switching device that applicant refers to. Clarification and/or appropriate correction is required.
Also, in claim 5, the recitation “wherein the control device is a digital-to-analog converter configured to convert a received voltage based on the control signal that is a received digital signal, and output the converted voltage as the switching signal” causes the claim to be indefinite because it is not clear the claim already recited “a control device provided in pair to constitute the two sides” (see line 3, claim 1), so it is not clear from the above phrase that which one of the pair and the side that the control device that applicant refers to. Clarification and/or appropriate correction is required.
Also, for claim 6, the recitation “the two sides” on line 2 is indefinite for the same reason as discussed in claim 1 above. Clarification and/or appropriate correction is required.
Also, for claims 7-8, the recitation “the switching element” on line 2 of each claim is indefinite for the same reason as discussed in claim 1 above and it is not clear which one of the pair applicant refers to. Clarification and/or appropriate correction is required.
Also, for claim 9, the recitation “for the control device provided in pair” on line 2 is indefinite for the same reason as discussed in claim 1 above . Clarification and/or appropriate correction is required.
For claim 14, because this claim recite similar recitation as in claim 1, so this claim is indefinite for the similar reasons as discussed in claim 1 above regarding the recitations: “a gate drive system that operates on two sides, a high side and a low side, and drives a gate of a power transistor” (lines 1-2); “a control device provided in pair to constitute the two sides, and configured to output a switching signal corresponding to the control signal output from the controller” (lines 5-6); and “a switching element provided in pair corresponding to the control device … a voltage corresponding to a level of the switching signal received from the control device” (lines 7-9). Thus, the metes and bounds of the claim cannot be determined renders the claim indefinite. Clarification and/or appropriate correction is required.
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.
Claims 1-5, 7-9 and 14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Kirchner et al. (US 2016/0329883).
For claim 1, Figure 5 of Kirchner et al. teaches a gate drive device (430) that operates on two sides, a high side (DAC 434 and Op-Amp 436 side) and a low side (DAC 442 and Op-Amp 444 side), and drives a gate of a power transistor (452), the gate drive device (430) comprising: a control device (434, 436, 442, 444) provided in pair to constitute the two sides (DAC 434 and Op-Amp 436 side; DAC 442 and Op-Amp 444 side), and configured to output a switching signal (output of 436, output of 444; see paragraphs [0030]-[0032] and [0036]) of three or more levels including a high level, a low level, and one or more intermediate levels between the high level and the low level according to a received control signal (input of 434, input of 442); and a switching element (438, 446) provided in pair corresponding to the control device, and configured to output, to the gate of the power transistor (452), a voltage (voltage at gate of 452) corresponding to a level of the switching signal (output of 436, output of 444) received from the control device (434, 436, 442, 444).
For claim 2, Figure 5 of Kirchner et al. teaches wherein the switching element (438, 446) is a MOSFET (438, 446), and the control device (434, 436, 442, 444) is configured to output the switching signal (output of 436, output of 444) corresponding to the received control signal (input of 434, input of 442) to a gate of the switching element (438, 446).
For claim 3, Figure 5 of Kirchner et al. teaches wherein the switching element (438, 446) is a MOSFET (438, 446), and the control device (434, 436, 442, 444) is configured to change a gate voltage of the switching element (438, 446) at three or more levels (see paragraphs [0030]-[0032] and [0036]) according to the received control signal (input of 434, input of 442).
For claim 4, it is seen that Figure 5 of Kirchner et al. teaches wherein the switching element is a bipolar transistor (see [0020] where it recites that, alternatively, bipolar transistor can be used instead of a MOSFET (438, 446) as the transistor the drives the gate of power transistor), and the control device (434, 436, 442, 444) is configured to change a gate voltage of the switching element (438, 446) at three or more levels (see paragraphs [0030]-[0032] and [0036]) according to the received control signal (input of 434, input of 442).
For claim 5, Figure 5 of Kirchner et al. teaches wherein the control device (434, 436, 442, 444) is a digital-to-analog converter (DAC 434, 442) configured to convert a received voltage based on the control signal that is a received digital signal (input of 434, input of 442), and output the converted voltage as the switching signal (output of 436, output of 444).
For claim 7, it is seen in the operation of Figure 5 of Kirchner et al. that teaches wherein a maximum current that is allowed to be output from the switching element (438, 446) to the gate of the power transistor (452) is determined according to a rated current of the switching element (438, 446) (this is because each of the drain/source current of element 438 and element 446 drives into the gate of the power transistor 452).
For claim 8, it is seen in the operation of Figure 5 of Kirchner et al. that teaches wherein a maximum current that is allowed to be output from the switching element (438, 446) to the gate of the power transistor (452) is determined according to a voltage supplied to the control device (434, 436, 442, 444) (this is because the output of switching element (438, 446) depends on the voltage to the gate of each element 438 and element 446, and the voltages at the gate of each of the element 438 and element 446 depends on the voltage of the control device (434, 436, 442, 444).
For claim 9, Figure 5 of Kirchner et al. teaches wherein for the control device (434, 436, 442, 444) provided in pair (434 and 436; 442 and 444), one controller (432) configured to generate the control signal (input of 434, input of 436) for the control device (434, 436, 442, 444) is provided.
For claim 14, Figure 5 of Kirchner et al. teaches a gate drive system (430) that operates on two sides, a high side (DAC 434 and Op-Amp 436 side) and a low side (DAC 442 and Op-Amp 444 side), and drives a gate of a power transistor (452), the gate drive system (430) comprising: a controller(432) configured to output a control signal (input of 434 and input of 442; see paragraphs [0030]-[0032] and [0036]) that is changeable at three or more levels including a high level, a low level, and one or more intermediate levels; a control device (434, 436, 442, 444) provided in pair to constitute the two sides (DAC 434 and Op-Amp 436 side; DAC 442 and Op-Amp 444 side), and configured to output a switching signal (output of 436, output of 444) corresponding to the control signal (input of 434 and input of 442) output from the controller (432); and a switching element (438, 446) provided in pair corresponding to the control device (434, 436, 442, 444), and configured to output, to the gate of the power transistor (452), a voltage corresponding to a level of the switching signal (output of 436, output of 444) received from the control device (434, 436, 442, 444).
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, 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 6 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kirchner et al. (US 2016/0329883) in view of Sawahara et al. (US 2022/0085805).
For claim 6, Figure 5 of Kirchner et al. teaches all the limitations of this claim as discussed above except for “wherein in an operation on at least one of the two sides, the control signal is at the intermediate level in at least one of a period during which the control signal changes from the high level to the low level and a period during which the control signal changes from the low level to the high level”. However, Sawahara et al. discloses a drive control circuit for driving a gate of an output transistor (Q1, Figure 1) where the voltage “is at the intermediate level in at least one of a period during which the control signal changes from the high level to the low level and a period during which the control signal changes from the low level to the high level” (see VG and VR, in Figure 3-5) in order to reduce EMI noise. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skilled in the art at the time before the invention was effectively filed to modify the gate drive circuit in Figure 5 of Kirchner et al. such that the control signal (input of 434, input of 442) so that the control signal is controlled as taught in Sawahara et al. for controlled the voltage of the DAC converters so as to reduce EMI noise, and thus this modification/combination teaches the limitation “wherein in an operation on at least one of the two sides, the control signal is at the intermediate level in at least one of a period during which the control signal changes from the high level to the low level and a period during which the control signal changes from the low level to the high level”.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directly to Examiner Long Nguyen whose telephone number is (571) 272-1753. The Examiner can normally be reached on Monday to Friday from 8:30am to 5:00pm.
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 number for this group 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).
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.
/Long Nguyen/
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 2842
Prosecution Insights