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 § 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 4-6 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 4 recites the limitation "the driver circuit" in line 1. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
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(s) 1-14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lee (US 2018/0219536) in view of EP1058385 (cited by the applicant).
Regarding claim 1, Lee discloses a swing-boosted differential oscillator (FIG 1 is substantially same as FIG 1 of this application ), comprising a switch (123) for connecting a set of capacitors (C1 and C2) alternately to poles of a direct current source (110 and ground) based on a switching control (CHOP AND CHOP bar),
Lee dose not discloses two comparators comprising back gate bias input as recited in the strikethrough.
EP1058385 discloses in FIG 22 (¶[0058-0083]) two comparators (120 and 121) comprising back gate bias input (VRH and VRL) as recited and also a multiplexer (129). EP1058385 also discloses that the back gate bias provides a short delay time and a high speed.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skilled in the art to use such features taught by EP1058385 because such a modification would have provided advantageous outcome as stated above.
Regarding claim 2, the modification or EP1058385 shows in FIG 14 wherein the comparators are complementary metal-oxide semiconductor, CMOS, inverters comprising at least two CMOS transistors having a back gate bias circuitry for biasing the inverters (necessarily present from VRH and VRL).
Regarding claim 3, EP1058385 shows the oscillator (FIG 22) further comprising a driver circuit for generating control signal for the back gate bias circuitry (necessarily present from VRH and VRL).
Regarding claim 4, the modification does not disclose wherein the driver circuit comprises a given number of resistors connected in series between a direct current source and ground, a set of switches where each switch is connected between the connection between two different successive resistors and the output of the driver circuit, and a switch controller for controlling the opening and closing of the switches. However, such features are well known for reference voltage drivers and therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skilled in the art to further modify because such modification would have been a mere substitution of art recognized equivalent driver.
Regarding claim 5, the modification does not disclose wherein the resistors connected in series are of equal resistance value. However, such features are well known for reference voltage drivers and therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skilled in the art to further modify because such modification would have been a mere substitution of art recognized equivalent driver.
Regarding claim 6, the modification would perform the oscillator wherein the switch controller controls the opening and closing of the switches such that only one switch at a time is closed (the functional recitation inherently present in the structure of the modified oscillator).
Regarding claim 7, the modification would perform the oscillator wherein the driver circuit is configured to reduce the voltage of the control signal for the back gate bias circuitry to lower the frequency of the output signal of the oscillator.
Regarding claim 8, the modification would perform the oscillator wherein the driver circuit is configured to increase the voltage of the control signal for the back gate bias circuitry to increase the frequency of the output signal of the oscillator.
Regarding claim 9, Lee discloses a method for trimming a swing-boosted differential oscillator (FIG 1), comprising connecting by a switch (123) a set of capacitors (C1 and C2) alternately to poles of a direct current source (110 and ground) based on a switching control (CHOP and CHOP bar), producing by
Lee dose not discloses two comparators comprising back gate bias input as recited in the strikethrough.
EP1058385 discloses in FIG 22 (¶[0058-0083]) two comparators (120 and 121) comprising back gate bias input (VRH and VRL). For a back gate bias circuitry or a driver circuit is necessarily present from VRH and VRL. EP1058385 also discloses that the back gate bias provides a short delay time and a high speed.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skilled in the art to use such features taught by EP1058385 because such a modification would have provided advantageous outcome as stated above.
Regarding claim 10, the modification implies the method further comprising: generating control signal for the back gate bias circuitry by a driver circuit (VRH and VRL).
Regarding claim 11, the modification does not disclose the method further comprising: adjusting the resistance of the driver circuit by a switch controller, the driver circuit comprising a given number of resistors connected in series between a direct current source and ground, the switch controller controlling opening and closing a set of switches, where each switch is connected between the connection between two different successive resistors and the output of the driver circuit. However, such features are well known for reference voltage drivers and therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skilled in the art to further modify because such modification would have been a mere substitution of art recognized equivalent driver.
Regarding claim 12, the modification would perform the method wherein controlling by the switch controller the opening and closing of the switches such that only one switch at a time is closed.
Regarding claim 13, the modification would perform the method further comprising: reducing the voltage of the control signal for the back gate bias circuitry to lower the frequency of the output signal of the oscillator.
Regarding claim 14, the modification would perform the method further comprising: increasing the voltage of the control signal for the back gate bias circuitry to increase the frequency of the output signal of the oscillator.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Xing (US 2010/0329157) discloses a differential circuit with back gate bias.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Joseph Chang whose telephone number is (571)272-1759. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 7:00- 17:00.
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, Menatoallah Youssef can be reached at 571-270-3684. 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.
/JOSEPH CHANG/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2849
Prosecution Insights