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 .
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.
Claims 1-2 and 14-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kwon et al. (US 2022/0321125) in view of Shau (US 2010/0327902).
In regards to claim 1, Kwon discloses of an electronic device comprising: a pad (for example 810) configured to be connected to an external device (120); and a transmitter (814) configured to drive the pad (810) in a first state, a second state, or a third state based on a signal being transmitted to the external device (120), wherein the first state includes a pull-up state (via 814U, see Fig 13), the second state includes a pull-down state (via 814D, see Fig 13), and the third state includes a state in which the pad (810) is connected to a ground node (VSSQ) to which a ground voltage is applied through a matching circuit comprising a switch and a resistor in series (114d, see Figs 12-13, 15-16).
However, Kwon does not explicitly disclose of wherein the matching circuit comprises a resistor and a capacitor connected in series.
Shau discloses of having RC (resistor/capacitor) matching circuits, wherein the matching circuit comprises a resistor and a capacitor connected in series (for example see Figs 5(a), 6(a), 7(a-b, h-k), 9(b-e)).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to have a matching circuit comprising a resistor and a capacitor connected in series as taught by Shau for reducing reflection effects of impedance mismatching.
In regards to claim 2, Kwon in view of Shau disclose of the electronic device of claim 1, wherein the transmitter (814 of Kwon) is configured to deactivate the matching circuit (114d) based on the pad being (810) driven to one of the first state and the second state (see Kwon Fig 13, matching is disabled during transmission).
In regards to claim 14, Kwon in view of Shau disclose of the electronic device of claim 1, wherein the electronic device is a memory device configured to receive a command and address signal and a clock signal from the external device (for example see Figs 1, 17 of Kwon), to communicate a data strobe signal with the external device, and to communicate a data signal with the external device in synchronization with the data strobe signal, and wherein the transmitter is configured to transmit the data signal to the external device based on one of the first state, the second state, or the third state used to drive the pad (see Kwon Figs 1, 12-13, 15-17).
In regards to claim 15, Kwon in view of Shau disclose of the electronic device of claim 1, wherein the electronic device is a memory device configured to receive a chip enable signal, a read enable signal, a write enable signal, and an address enable signal from the external device (for example see Figs 1, 17 of Kwon), to communicate a data strobe signal with the external device, and to communicate a data signal with the external device in synchronization with the data strobe signal, and wherein the transmitter is configured to transmit the data signal to the external device based on one of the first state, the second state, or the third state (see Kwon Figs 1, 12-13, 15-17).
In regards to claim 16, Kwon discloses of a method of operating an electronic device that includes a transmitter (for example 814) and a receiver (for example 812) configured to communicate with an external device (120), the method comprising: based on transmitting a first signal to the external device (120) using the transmitter (814), turning on a pull-up circuit (see 814U in Fig 13) of the transmitter (814), turning off a pull-down circuit (see 814D) of the transmitter, and deactivating a matching circuit (114d, see Fig 12) of the transmitter (814); based on transmitting a second signal to the external device (120) using the transmitter (814), turning off the pull-up circuit (814U), turning on the pull-down circuit (814D), and deactivating the matching circuit (114s); and based on transmitting a third signal to the external device (120) using the transmitter, turning off the pull-up circuit (814U), turning off the pull-down circuit (814D), and activating the matching circuit comprising a switch and a resistor in series (114f, matching circuit activated when supplying a matching impedance during receiving).
However, Kwon does not explicitly disclose of wherein the matching circuit comprises a resistor and a capacitor connected in series.
Shau discloses of having RC (resistor/capacitor) matching circuits, wherein the matching circuit comprises a resistor and a capacitor connected in series (for example see Figs 5(a), 6(a), 7(a-b, h-k), 9(b-e)).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to have a matching circuit comprising a resistor and a capacitor connected in series as taught by Shau for reducing reflection effects of impedance mismatching.
In regards to claim 17, Kwon in view of Shau disclose of the method of claim 16, further comprising deactivating the matching circuit (114 of Kwon) based on a signal (C1) being received from the external device using the transmitter (see Kwon Figs 1, 12-13, 15-16).
In regards to claim 18, Kwon in view of Shau discloses of the method of claim 16, further comprising: performing ZQ calibration; and adjusting an impedance of the matching circuit (114) based on a result of the ZQ calibration (via 112, see Kwon Figs 1, 12-13, 15-16).
In regards to claim 19, Kwon discloses of an electronic system comprising: a first electronic device including a first transmitter (814) and a first receiver (812); and a second electronic device including a second transmitter (824) and a second receiver (822), wherein the second receiver (822) is configured to, based on the first transmitter being pulled up, generate a first signal in response to the first transmitter (814) being pulled up, wherein the second receiver (822) is configured to, based on the first transmitter (814) being pulled down, generate a second signal in response to the first transmitter (814) being pulled down, and wherein the second receiver (822) is configured to, based on the first transmitter (814) activating a first matching circuit (114d), generate a third signal, the first matching circuit including a switch and a resistor in series (see 114d and Figs 12-13, 15-16).
However, Kwon does not explicitly disclose of wherein the matching circuit comprises a resistor and a capacitor connected in series.
Shau discloses of having RC (resistor/capacitor) matching circuits, wherein the matching circuit comprises a resistor and a capacitor connected in series (for example see Figs 5(a), 6(a), 7(a-b, h-k), 9(b-e)).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to have a matching circuit comprising a resistor and a capacitor connected in series as taught by Shau for reducing reflection effects of impedance mismatching.
In regards to claim 20, Kwon in view of Shau disclose of the electronic system of claim 19, wherein the second transmitter (824) is configured to, based on one of the first signal, the second signal, or the third signal being communicated to the second transmitter (824) by the first transmitter (814), deactivate a second matching circuit (124d, see Kwon Figs 12-13, 15-16).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 3-13 are 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.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
In regards to claim 3, the prior art does not explicitly disclose of the electronic device of claim 1, wherein the matching circuit includes: a transistor connected to the pad and controlled by an internal circuit; and the resistor and the capacitor that are connected in series between the transistor and the ground node, nor would it have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to do so. Claims 4-7 are also objected to as being dependent on claim 3.
In regards to claim 8, the prior art does not explicitly disclose of the electronic device of claim 1, further comprising a receiver connected to the pad, wherein the receiver includes a transimpedance amplify receiver, nor would it have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to do so. Claims 9-13 are also objected to as being dependent on claim 8.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claims 1, 16 and 19 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Honda et al. (US 2019/0158144)
Yuuki et al. (US 2013/0342943)
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Jason M Crawford whose telephone number is (571)272-6004. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Thurs 6:30am-3:00pm, Fri 6:30am-12:30pm.
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, Alexander Taningco can be reached at 571-272-8048. 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.
/JASON M CRAWFORD/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2845
Prosecution Insights