DETAILED ACTION
This action is responsive to the following communications: Application filed on Sept. 13, 2024.
Claims 1-15 are presented for Examination. Claims 1 and 11 are independent.
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 .
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112:
The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention.
Claims 1-15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) as failing to comply with the written description requirement.
The specification fails to adequately describe how the comparison unit automatically changes the resistance of the pull-up resistor unit based solely on comparator outputs without additional control circuitry. The disclosure at paragraphs [0047]-[0053] describes the functional result of changing resistance values but lacks sufficient detail regarding the physical implementation of this automatic adjustment mechanism. Specifically, the application does not provide adequate written description support for the limitation "wherein the comparison unit is configured to change the resistance of the pull-up resistor unit based on an output of the comparator" as recited in independent claims 1 and 11 .
While the specification describes using a switch (230) connected to a second pull-up resistor (220) in series, with the gate terminal connected to an output terminal of a second comparator (440), it fails to describe with sufficient particularity how this arrangement achieves automatic resistance adjustment without additional processing elements. The disclosure at paragraphs [0061]-[0068] provides mathematical formulas for reference voltages but does not adequately explain the physical circuit implementation that would enable the claimed automatic resistance changing functionality.
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 1-15 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 pre-AIA the applicant regards as the invention.
The term "pull-up resistor unit" in claims 1 and 11 is indefinite. The specification uses this term inconsistently, sometimes referring to a single resistor and other times to a combination of resistors and switching elements. The claim fails to clearly define the structural components that constitute the "pull-up resistor unit" versus the "pull-up resistor" also recited in the same claim. This creates ambiguity regarding the scope of the claimed invention.
Additionally, the limitation "the pull-up resistor having a resistance that varies depending on a temperature inside the motor" in claim 1 is indefinite when considered in light of the remainder of the claim. The claim later recites that the comparison unit changes the resistance of the pull-up resistor unit. It is unclear whether the resistance variation is solely due to temperature effects on the NTC thermistor, or whether it also includes the active resistance changes performed by the comparison unit. This dual functionality creates ambiguity regarding the structural and functional relationship between these elements.
Appropriate correction is requested.
Since the independent claims 1 and 11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) and 112(b) hence the dependent claims of 1 are also rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) and 112(b).
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 of this title, 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.
Claims 1–15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kim (US 2022/0201816 A1) in view of Perrott et al. (US 9,182,295 B1).
Regarding Independent Claim 1, Kim teaches that a temperature sensing device (an apparatus for controlling a lamp having a temperature sensing circuit; Kim, Abstract; [0052]), comprising:
a negative temperature coefficient (NTC) thermistor installed on a motor( first/second thermal resistors 130, 230 that "may be NTC thermistors of which resistances decrease as the temperature of an LED chip rises" (Kim [0048]) and which are installed on a heat-generating component (LED chip/board) to sense its temperature (Kim [0048]–[0050]). (See obviousness discussion below regarding the recited "motor.");
a pull-up resistor connected to one end of the NTC thermistor ( a fifth resistor R5 "connected between Vcc and Vout3" with the sixth resistor R6, and a seventh resistor R7 connected in a corresponding divider, forming a pull-up/voltage-divider network in series with the thermal resistor (Kim [0074]; FIG. 2), such that the output voltage varies with the NTC resistance)
a voltage output unit configured to output a voltage based on a change in resistance of the NTC thermistor according to a change in temperature ( the second information collection device 330, which "obtain[s] Vout3 which is the voltage across the sixth resistor R6" and calculates the thermal-resistor resistance from the voltage-division law (Kim [0075]–[0076]);
a comparison unit including a comparator for comparing the voltage value output from the voltage output unit with a reference voltage (the controller 350 detects temperature based on the thermal-resistor resistance and determines "when the temperature attains or exceeds a specified threshold value" (Kim [0082]), i.e., compares the sensed voltage/value against a reference threshold (Kim [0100], [0102]; FIG. 8, S104/S108))
wherein the comparison unit is configured to change the resistance of the pull-up resistor unit based on an output of the comparator( acting upon the result of the threshold comparison to change a circuit drive parameter (driving current) (Kim [0082]). Kim does not expressly disclose changing the resistance of the pull-up resistor unit based on the comparator output).
Perrott teaches that temperature-sensing circuitry in which a comparator circuit compares the resistance of a temperature-sensitive thermistor against a reference resistance and, based on the comparator's error output, adjusts the reference resistance in a feedback loop: "comparator circuitry, coupled to the switched capacitor network and the MEMS thermistor, to generate error data using (i) the effective resistance of the switched capacitor network and (ii) the resistance of the MEMS thermistor" (Perrott, claim 10; see also col. 10, lns.: 55–62); a feedback loop in which the effective resistance of the switched capacitor network is adjusted in a direction that lessens the difference between the effective resistance … and the resistance of the MEMS thermistor" (Perrott, claim 16; col. 18, cited passage; FIG. 13)
Perrott expressly teaches doing so without software/complex calibration, using hardware feedback to "control the reference resistor value from the comparison output (Perrott, col. 6, item 5; col. 10, lns. 50–62). This directly corresponds to the recited "comparison unit … configured to change the resistance of the pull-up resistor unit based on an output of the comparator."
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Kim's NTC/pull-up temperature-sensing circuit so that the comparison result adjusts the pull-up (reference) resistance, as taught by Perrott, in order to maintain measurement linearity and accuracy across a wide temperature range in hardware, as expressly motivated by Kim itself, which recognizes the "non-linear characteristics of the NTC thermistor" as a problem to be solved (Kim [0004]).
Regarding claim 2, Kim in view of Perrott renders obvious the "first reference voltage output unit," "second reference voltage output unit," and "first comparator"/"second comparator" arrangement. Kim discloses comparing sensed temperature values against threshold values that differ by temperature range/section (Kim [0100], [0102]–[0103]). Providing plural reference-voltage outputs and cascaded comparators (a first comparator comparing the divider/voltage-output-unit output against a first reference, and a second comparator receiving the first comparator output and comparing it against a second reference) is a predictable implementation of Kim's multi-threshold determination combined with Perrott's comparator-based error/feedback generation (Perrott, claims 10, 17; col. 10, ll. 55–62). One of ordinary skill would have found it obvious before the effective filing date of the invention to implement the threshold comparisons as staged comparators to obtain hysteresis/range-dependent switching with predictable results.
Regarding claim 3-4, Kim discloses selecting different threshold/reference values depending on whether the current temperature section is low or high (Kim [0089]–[0091], [0100]–[0103]), i.e., outputting a first (lower) reference value in response to the comparator output being below a predetermined value and a different (higher) reference value when above. Selecting the first reference (claim 3) lower than the second (claim 4) is an obvious design choice to establish switching hysteresis, yielding the predictable benefit of stable range transitions).
Regarding claim 5, Kim teaches that a DC power source (Vcc) connected to the pull-up/divider network and to the collection/comparison circuitry (Kim [0074]; FIG.2 ; Obvious over Kim)
Regarding claim 6–8, Kim teaches that a resistor network of first/second/third/fourth resistors forming voltage dividers connected between Vcc, the output nodes, and ground (e.g., R5–R6 and R7–R8; Kim [0074]; FIG. 2), and expressly discloses determining reference/threshold values by the voltage-division law (Kim [0075]–[0076], Equations 3–4). Determining the recited 1-1st/1-2nd reference voltages by the claimed voltage-divider formulas (claims 7–8) is a routine application of the voltage-division law already taught by Kim and would have been obvious.
Regarding claim 9–10,
Claim 9 Kim teaches that the first pull-up resistor connected to the NTC, a second pull-up resistor connected in parallel, and a switch in series with the second pull-up resistor whose gate is driven by the second comparator) is rendered obvious by Kim's teaching that an "active element such as a transistor" is used to vary the pull-up resistance (see Application [0005] acknowledging this was known), combined with Perrott's comparator-controlled adjustment of the reference resistance (Perrott, FIG. 13; claim 16). Providing a parallel resistor selectively connected by a comparator-driven switch is a predictable hardware realization of "changing the resistance of the pull-up resistor unit based on an output of the comparator.".
Claim 10 recited limitations of protection resistor connected between the other end of the NTC thermistor and ground is obvious over Kim, which discloses series resistors and grounded divider legs to prevent excessive current (Kim [0074]; FIG. 2); adding a grounded protection resistor is a conventional current-limiting measure.
Regarding independent claim 11, Claim 11 recites a temperature sensing device for a vehicle with the NTC thermistor installed on a motor of the vehicle, a pull-up resistor, a voltage outputter, and a controller comprising a comparator that changes the pull-up resistance based on the comparison. This is rejected on the same basis as claim 1. Kim discloses a vehicle application (Kim [0003], [0042]) and a controller 350 performing threshold comparison and responsive circuit control (Kim [0082], [0100]–[0103]); Perrott supplies the controller/comparator changing the reference (pull-up) resistance based on the comparator output (Perrott, claims 10, 16). Installing the circuit on a vehicle drive motor is an obvious field-of-use selection as discussed for claim 1.
Regarding claim 12-15, Claim 12 corresponds to claim 2 (controller with first/second reference-voltage outputters and first/second comparators) and is obvious for the reasons given for claim 2.
Claim 13 corresponds to claims 3 (reference selection based on comparator output) and is obvious over Kim's multi-threshold selection (Kim [0100]–[0103]).
Claim 14 (first reference lower than second) is an obvious design choice as in claim 4.
Claim 15 (DC power source connected to the pull-up resistor and controller) is obvious over Kim (Vcc; Kim [0074]; FIG. 2).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MUHAMMAD S ISLAM whose telephone number is (571)272-8439. The examiner can normally be reached 9:30am to 6:00pm.
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, Eduardo Colon-Santana can be reached on 571-272-2060. 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.
/MUHAMMAD S ISLAM/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2837
Prosecution Insights