Ex Parte Ausserlechner

Patent Trial and Appeal Board

Mar 29, 2016

12963787 (P.T.A.B. Mar. 29, 2016)

UNITED STA TES p A TENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
APPLICATION NO. FILING DATE
12/963,787 12/09/2010
38881 7590
Infineon Technologies AG
c/o Schiff Hardin LLP
666 Fifth A venue
Suite 1700
NEW YORK, NY 10103
03/31/2016
FIRST NAMED INVENTOR
Udo Ausserlechner
UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
United States Patent and Trademark Office
Address: COMMISSIONER FOR PATENTS
P.O. Box 1450
Alexandria, Virginia 22313-1450
www .uspto.gov
ATTORNEY DOCKET NO. CONFIRMATION NO.
42792-0346 3578
EXAMINER
NADAV,ORI
ART UNIT PAPER NUMBER
2811
NOTIFICATION DATE DELIVERY MODE
03/31/2016 ELECTRONIC
Please find below and/or attached an Office communication concerning this application or proceeding.
The time period for reply, if any, is set in the attached communication.
Notice of the Office communication was sent electronically on above-indicated "Notification Date" to the
following e-mail address( es):
lbrutman@schiffhardin.com
patents-NY@schiffhardin.com
PTOL-90A (Rev. 04/07)
UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
Ex parte UDO AUSSERLECHNER1
Appeal2014-0011962
Application 12/963,787
Technology Center 2800
Before JEAN R. HOMERE, ELENI MANTIS MERCADER, and
JAMES W. DEJMEK, Administrative Patent Judges.
DEJMEK, Administrative Patent Judge.
DECISION ON APPEAL
1 Appellant identifies Infineon Technologies AG as the real party in interest.
App. Br. 2.
2 This appeal is related to an appeal of co-pending application 12/963,817
(Appeal No. 2014-001197). App. Br. 3. An Oral Hearing was held in this
appeal on Feb. 29, 2016.
Appeal2014-001196
Application 12/963,787
Appellant appeals under 35 U.S.C. § 134(a) from a non-final rejection
of claims 1, 6-13, 15, 16, and 29. Claims 2--4, 14, and 17-28 have been
withdrawn from consideration. App. Br. 27-31. We have jurisdiction over
the remaining pending claims under 35 U.S.C. § 6(b). 3
We reverse.
STATEMENT OF THE CASE
Introduction
Appellant's invention is directed to magnetic field current sensors.
Abstract. In a disclosed embodiment, a magnetic field current sensor is
positioned to sense current flowing through a unitary conductor clip by
detecting the magnetic field induced by the current. Spec. 2, 11, Figs. 1, 6,
and 14.
Claim 1 is illustrative of the claims on appeal and is reproduced below
with the disputed limitation emphasized in italics:
1. A magnetic field current sensor comprising:
a semiconductor die having a first surface and a second surface,
the first surface and the second surface opposing one another, and
comprising at least one magnetic field sensing element: and
a unitary conductor configured to carry current to be sensed by
the at least one magnetic field current sensor and comprising a
footprint portion, a first pillar portion, a second pillar portion, a first
contact portion, and a second contact portion, the first pillar portion
having a first height and coupling the first contact portion to the
footprint portion, the second pillar portion having the first height and
coupling the second contact portion to the footprint portion, the first
3 Because the claims on appeal have been twice rejected, we have
jurisdiction pursuant to 35 U.S.C. §§ 6 and 134. Ex parte Lemoine, 46
USPQ2d 1420, 1423 (BPAI 1994) (precedential).
2
Appeal2014-001196
Application 12/963,787
height being a monotonic vertical dimension separating the footprint
portion from the first contact portion and the second contact portion,
and the footprint portion coupling the conductor to the first surface of
the semiconductor die such that the footprint portion is substantially
parallel to the first surface of the semiconductor die and within a
perimeter of the first surface, and the first contact portion and the
second contacts portion are closer to the first surface than the second
surface, wherein the unitary conductor is configured to carry current
between the first contact portion and the second contact portion.
The Examiner's Rejections4
1. Claims 1, 6-13, 15, 16, and 29 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C.
§ 112, first paragraph as failing to comply with the written description
requirement. Non-Final Act. 2-3.
2. Claims 1, 6-13, 15, 16, and 29 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C.
§ 103(a) as being unpatentable over Engel et al. (US 5,963,028; Oct. 5,
1999) ("Engel"). Non-Final Act. 4--7.
Issues on Appeal
1. Did the Examiner err in finding there is no explicit support in
the embodiment of Figure 14 for "the unitary conductor configured to carry
current sensed by the magnetic field current sensor," as recited in claim 1?
2. Did the Examiner err in finding there is no explicit support in
the embodiment of Figure 14 for "the at least one magnetic field sensing
element is configured to sense a magnetic field induced by the current
carried by the conductor," as recited in claim 29"
4 Claims 1, 6-13, 15, 16, and 29 had been rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 112,
second paragraph as being indefinite. Non-Final Act. 3. The Examiner has
withdrawn this rejection. Ans. 2.
3
Appeal2014-001196
Application 12/963,787
3. Did the Examiner err in finding Engel teaches or suggests a
magnetic field current sensor, as recited in claim 1?
ANALYSIS5
Rejection under 35 U.S. C. § 112, first paragraph
The Examiner finds "[t]here is no explicit support in the embodiment
of figure 14 for the claimed limitation of 'the unitary conductor configured
to carry current sensed by the magnetic field current sensor', [sic] as
recited in claim 1." Non-Final Act. 2. Similarly, the Examiner also finds
"[t]here is no explicit support in the embodiment of figure 14 for the claimed
limitation of 'the at least one magnetic field sensing element is configured to
sense a magnetic field induced by the current carried by the conductor', [sic]
as recited in claim 29." Non-Final Act. 3.
Appellant contends the Examiner erred in limiting support for the
claimed limitations to only Figure 14, rather than in view of the entire
specification and other figures. App. Br. 16. Further, Appellant contends a
person of ordinary skill in the art would recognize that "magnetic field
current sensors sense current carried by a conductor." App. Br. 17-18.
Additionally, Appellant argues that Figure 14 contains sufficient support for
the disputed limitations of claims 1 and 29. App. Br. 17. For example,
Appellant identifies the illustrated flow of current through the conductor in
Figure 14 and related text from the Specification. App. Br. 17.
5 Throughout this opinion we have considered the Appeal Brief filed
August 8, 2013 ("App. Br."); Reply Brief filed October 28, 2013 ("Reply
Br."); the Examiner's Answer mailed on August 28, 2013 ("Ans."); and the
Non-Final Office Action mailed on March 5, 2013, from which this Appeal
is taken ("Non-Final Act.").
4
Appeal2014-001196
Application 12/963,787
We find Appellant's arguments and contentions persuasive of
Examiner error. We agree that Figure 14A indicates a direction of the flow
of current carried through the unitary conductor and that Figure 14 B
includes a magnetic field current sensor positioned to sense current flowing
through the unitary conductor. See Figs. 14A, 14B. Further, we agree with
Appellant that a person of ordinary skill in the art would recognize a
magnetic field current sensor senses current in a conductor by sensing a
magnetic field induced by that current.
For the reasons discussed supra, we find on the record before us
sufficient support for the disputed limitations. Accordingly, we do not
sustain the Examiner's rejection of claims 1, 6-13, 15, 16, and 29 under 35
U.S.C. § 112, first paragraph.
Rejection under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a)
Appellant contends the Examiner erred in finding Engel teaches or
suggests a unitary conductor configured to carry current to be sensed by the
at least one magnetic field current sensor, as recited in claim 1, "because
Engel discloses a magnetic speed or rotation sensor rather than a magnetic
field current sensor." App. Br. 21. Appellant contends Engel uses a
permanent magnet to create a magnetic field and then detects a
ferromagnetic object (i.e., a tooth of an exciter wheel). App. Br. 22 (citing
Engel, col. 3, 11. 19-22, Fig. 2). Appellant argues this is different than the
claimed invention wherein a magnetic field is induced by current flowing
through a conductor and the current is sensed by the resulting (induced)
magnetic field. App. Br. 22.
5
Appeal2014-001196
Application 12/963,787
The Examiner explains the rejection merely states Engel teaches a
unitary conductor can be configured to carry current to be sensed by a
magnetic field current sensor. Ans. 9. The Examiner further explains that
even if the operation of Engel's device is different from Appellant's claimed
device, Engel's structure is still capable of sensing a magnetic field and,
therefore, current. Ans. 9-10. Additionally, the Examiner states that it
would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to configure
the unitary conductor of Engel to carry current that could be sensed by the
sensor. The Examiner states that such a modification could be used to test
the structure for manufacturing defects. Ans. 10. The Examiner finds
Figure 4 of Engel "depicts a unitary conductor comprising parallel leads 64,
66, and 68 which are connected to each other by a vertical un-numbered
lead," which allows current to flow between any two of leads 64, 66, and/or
68. Ans. 11.
We disagree with the Examiner's findings and conclusion of
obviousness. Engel is directed toward "the assembly and packaging of
integrated circuits including a Hall effect sensor die and magnet to reduce
the minimum obtainable distance between the sensing device and a
ferromagnetic object being sensed." Engel, col. 1, 11. 9-13. Thus, we agree
with the Appellant that Engel uses a permanent magnet to create a magnetic
field and subsequently senses a magnetic flux through the Hall effect
element that varies in a manner corresponding to the position of
ferromagnetic objects (i.e., teeth of an exciter wheel). See Engel, col. 2,
11. 9-16. Engel differs from the claimed invention, which has a magnetic
field induced by the flow of current, which is then sensed, through a unitary
conductor.
6
Appeal2014-001196
Application 12/963,787
Further, we disagree with the Examiner's hypothetical example that
Engel could be configured to be carry current between any two of the leads
( 64, 66, and 68) of Figure 4 and be sensed by the magnetic field current
sensor. Figure 4 of Engel is illustrative and is reproduced below.
FJG.4
Figure 4 shows a view of the leadframe used during manufacture of the
device, including the die ( 46) and magnet ( 48). Engel, col. 4, 11. 20-22.
Contrary to the Examiner's statement, Figure 4 of Engel does not depict a
unitary conductor comprising parallel leads ( 64, 66, and 68), which are
connected to each other by a vertical un-numbered lead. See Ans. 11.
Rather, lead 68 is shown as directly forming the die attach pad (58) and the
die is connected to the leads via bond wires (80, 82, and 84). Engel, col. 6,
11. 7-17. The Examiner has not persuasively demonstrated how it would be
obvious to an ordinarily-skilled artisan to reconfigure the device of Engel
(including the permanent magnet that creates a magnetic field) to have
7
Appeal2014-001196
Application 12/963,787
current flow through two of the leads ( 64, 66, and 68), be sensed by Hall
effect sensor die ( 46), and provide an indication of the sensed current. We
find this hypothetical reconfiguration to be both unsupported and
speculative.
For the reasons discussed supra, we are persuaded of Examiner error.
Accordingly, we do not sustain the Examiner's rejection under 35 U.S.C.
§ 103(a) of independent claim 1 or of claims 6-13, 15, 16, and 29, which
depend therefrom.
DECISION6
We reverse the Examiner's decision rejecting claims 1, 6-13, 15, 16,
and 29 under 35 U.S.C. § 112, first paragraph.
We reverse the Examiner's decision rejecting claims 1, 6-13, 15, 16,
and 29 under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a).
REVERSED
6 Appellant's request that claims 2-5, 14, and 17, which had been withdrawn
following a Restriction Requirement, be rejoined and allowed is an
appealable matter and, accordingly, is not before us. See 37 C.F.R. § 1.144.
8