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 .
Non-final communication in response to communication filed 6/6/25.
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 5-9, 12,13,15-18 and 22 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.
With respect to claim 5, the recitation “a first supply voltage” in line 5, is indefinite because its unclear if it is the same as or in addition to the first supply voltage of claim 1.
Claim 6 recites the limitation "the first control voltage" in line 4. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Recited in claim 5
Claim 7 recites the limitation "the second control voltage" in line 4. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Recited in claim 5.
Claim 7 recites the limitation "the electrostatic detection signal" in line 5. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Recited in claim 6.
Claim 8 recites the limitation "the third control voltage" in line 4. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Recited in claim 5.
Claim 8 recites the limitation "the driving control signal" in line 6. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Recited in claim 7.
Claim 9 recites the limitation "the selection control circuit" in line 2. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Recited in claim 3.
Claim 12 recites the limitation "the driving control circuit" in line 5. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Recited in claim 7.
Claim 12 recites the limitation "the second control voltage" in line 6. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Recited in claim 5.
Claim 12 recites the limitation "the electrostatic detection signal" in line 8. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Recited in claim 6.
Claim 13 recites the limitation "the electrostatic detection circuit" in line 2. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Recited in claim 6.
Claim 13 recites the limitation "the first control voltage" in line 3. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Recited in claim 5.
Claim 13 recites the limitation "the discharge driving circuit" in line 5. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Recited in claim 8.
Claim 13 recites the limitation "the third control voltage" in line 6. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Recited in claim 5.
Claim 13 recites the limitation "the driving control signal" in line 7-8. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Recited in claim 7.
Claim 15 recites the limitation "the detection circuit" in line 4. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Recited in claim 14.
Claim 16 recites the limitation "the control signal" in line 4. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Recited in claim 15.
Claim 17 recites the limitation "the control voltage generation circuit" in line 2. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Recited in claim 5.
Claim 18 recites the limitation "the control voltage generation circuit" in line 2. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Recited in claim 5.
Claim 18 recites the limitation "the transfer circuit" in line 4. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Recited in claim 17.
Claim 18 recites the limitation "the first to third control voltages" in lines4-5. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Recited in claim 5.
Claim 22 recites the limitation "the first low voltage NMOS transistor" in lines 3-4. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Recited in claim 21.
Claim 22 recites the limitation "the second low voltage NMOS transistor" in lines 8-9. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Recited in claim 21.
Claim 22 recites the limitation "the third low voltage NMOS transistor" in lines 12-13. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Recited in claim 21.
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 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.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1-4,9,14,23 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Bhattacharaya te al. 20080074171
With respect to claim 23, figures 2 and 3 of Bhattacharaya et al. discloses an electronic system, comprising:
a first electrostatic discharge circuit [208] configured to perform a discharge operation on static electricity included in a first supply voltage [VDD_A];
a second electrostatic discharge circuit [210] configured to perform a discharge operation on static electricity contained in a second supply voltage [VDD_B] being lower than, the first supply voltage; [para 0002-0003] and
a selection control circuit [206] configured to selectively control one of the first and second electrostatic discharge circuits based on a selected supply voltage of the first and second supply voltages, the selected supply voltage being applied to a supply voltage terminal,
wherein the first electrostatic discharge circuit includes at least one low voltage transistor which has a driving voltage lower than the first supply voltage. [M2 is driven by N3]
With respect to claim 1, figures 2 and 3 of Bhattacharaya et al. discloses an electrostatic discharge control system, comprising:
a first electrostatic discharge circuit [208] configured to perform a discharge operation on static electricity contained in a first supply voltage [VDD_A]; and
a second electrostatic discharge circuit [210] configured to perform a discharge operation on static electricity contained in a second supply voltage [VDD_B]. [VDD can be different para 0016]
With respect to claim 2, figures 2 and 3 of Bhattacharaya et al. discloses the electrostatic discharge control system of claim 1, wherein the first supply voltage has a higher voltage level than the second supply voltage. [0002-0003]
With respect to claim 3, figures 2 and 3 of Bhattacharaya et al. discloses the electrostatic discharge control system of claim 1, further comprising:
a selection control circuit configured to selectively control the first or second electrostatic discharge circuit based on a selected supply voltage of the first and second supply voltages.
[controlled by being supply turn on]
With respect to claim 4, figures 2 and 3 of Bhattacharaya et al. discloses the electrostatic discharge control system of claim 3, wherein the selected supply voltage is applied to a supply voltage terminal [VDD_A or VDD_B].
With respect to claim 9, figures 2 and 3 of Bhattacharaya et al. discloses the electrostatic discharge control system according to claim 1, wherein the selection control circuit selectively provides the first or second supply voltage to the first or second electrostatic discharge circuit, respectively. [SW_A, SW_B]
With respect to claim 14, figures 2 and 3 of Bhattacharaya et al. discloses the electrostatic discharge control system according to claim 1, wherein the second electrostatic discharge circuit comprises: a detection circuit [210] configured to detect static electricity contained in the second supply voltage.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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 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 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 5-9, 12-18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bhattacharya et al. 20080074171 in view of Wang et al 20090015974 .
Insofar as understood With respect to claim 5, figures 2 and 3 of Bhattacharya et al. discloses the electrostatic discharge control system of claim 1, but does not disclose wherein the first electrostatic discharge circuit comprises:
a control voltage generation circuit configured to generate a first control voltage , a second control voltage, and a third control voltage by dividing a [the?] first supply voltage [VDD_A].
However, Figure 2 of Wang et al. discloses a more modern ESD circuit for extending the duration of discharge and discloses a first electrostatic discharge circuit comprises:
a control voltage generation circuit [102] configured to generate a first control voltage [V1], a second control voltage [V2], and a third control voltage [V3] by dividing a [the?] first supply voltage. [VDD]
It would have been obvious to one skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the application to use the ESD clamp of Wang et al. as the clamps 208 and 210 fo Bhattacharya et al. since it extends the discharge time and was a known technique in the art.
Insofar as understood With respect to claim 6, the above combination discloses the electrostatic discharge control system of claim 1, wherein the first electrostatic discharge circuit comprises:
an electrostatic detection circuit [M1-M3] configured to set a first setup voltage [N1] based on the first control voltage [V1, N2], and generate an electrostatic detection signal [N3] by detecting static electricity contained in the first setup voltage.
Insofar as understood With respect to claim 7, the above combination discloses the electrostatic discharge control system of claim 1, wherein the first electrostatic discharge circuit comprises:
a driving control circuit [104, 10311] configured to set a second setup voltage [voltage N8] based on the second control voltage [V2], and generate a driving control signal [Strigger, N10] based on the electrostatic detection signal.
Insofar as understood With respect to claim 8, the above combination discloses the electrostatic discharge control system of claim 1, wherein the first electrostatic discharge circuit comprises:
a discharge driving circuit [105] configured to set a third setup voltage [voltage connection of 1053,1052, 1051] based on the third control voltage, and perform a discharge operation on static electricity contained in the third setup voltage based on the driving control signal.
Insofar as understood With respect to claim 9, the above combination discloses the electrostatic discharge control system according to claim 1, wherein the selection control circuit selectively provides the first or second supply voltage to the first or second electrostatic discharge circuit, respectively.
Insofar as understood With respect to claim 12, the above combination discloses the electrostatic discharge control system according to claim 1, wherein the electrostatic detection circuit comprises a first low voltage transistor [M2] configured to receive the first control voltage [V1], and
wherein the driving control circuit comprises a second low voltage transistor [Ms2] configured to receive the second control voltage [V2], and a third low voltage transistor [Ms1] configured to receive the electrostatic detection signal.
Insofar as understood With respect to claim 13, the above combination discloses the electrostatic discharge control system according to claim 1, wherein the electrostatic detection circuit comprises a first low voltage transistor [M2] configured to receive the first control voltage [V1], and
wherein the discharge driving circuit [101,105] comprises a fourth low voltage transistor [Ms2] configured to receive the third control voltage [V3], and a fifth low voltage transistor [1052] configured to receive the driving control signal.
Insofar as understood With respect to claim 14, figures 2 and 3 of Bhattacharaya et al. discloses the electrostatic discharge control system according to claim 1, wherein the second electrostatic discharge circuit comprises: a detection circuit [104] configured to detect static electricity contained in the second supply voltage.
Insofar as understood With respect to claim 15, the above combination discloses the electrostatic discharge control system according to claim 1, wherein the second electrostatic discharge circuit comprises:
a driving circuit [ 10311] configured to generate a control signal [voltage N8] based on an output signal [voltage N3] of the detection circuit.
Insofar as understood With respect to claim 16, the above combination discloses the electrostatic discharge control system according to claim 1, wherein the second electrostatic discharge circuit comprises:
a discharge circuit [104, second clamp] configured to form a discharge path for the second supply voltage based on the control signal.
Insofar as understood With respect to claim 17, the above combination discloses the electrostatic discharge control system according to claim 1, wherein the control voltage generation circuit comprises:
a transfer circuit [Sw_A] configured to transfer the first supply voltage in response to a selection control signal.
Insofar as understood With respect to claim 18, the above combination discloses the electrostatic discharge control system according to claim 1, wherein the control voltage generation circuit comprises:
a voltage dividing circuit [102] configured to receive a voltage transferred through the transfer circuit, and generate the first to third control voltages [V1, V2, V3] by dividing the receive voltage.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 19-21 are allowed.
Claims 10 and 11 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.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to RYAN C JAGER whose telephone number is (571)272-7016. The examiner can normally be reached on 8:30 - 5:30 PM.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Taelor Kim can be reached on 571-270-7166. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned 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). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/RYAN JAGER/
Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2842
10/6/26
Prosecution Insights