Ex Parte Deboy

Patent Trial and Appeal Board

Jul 5, 2016

12239482 (P.T.A.B. Jul. 5, 2016)

UNITED STA TES p A TENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
APPLICATION NO. FILING DATE
12/239,482 09/26/2008
48154 7590
SLATER MATSIL, LLP
17950 PRESTON ROAD
SUITE 1000
DALLAS, TX 75252
07/07/2016
FIRST NAMED INVENTOR
Gerald Deboy
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.
INF 2007 P 50156 US 3514
EXAMINER
0 TOOLE, COLLEEN J
ART UNIT PAPER NUMBER
2842
NOTIFICATION DATE DELIVERY MODE
07/07/2016 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):
docketing@slatermatsil.com
PTOL-90A (Rev. 04/07)
UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
Ex parte GERALD DEBOY 1
Appeal2015-000653
Application 12/239,482
Technology Center 2800
Before BRADLEY R. GARRIS, MARK NAGUMO, and DEBRA L.
DENNETT, Administrative Patent Judges.
GARRIS, Administrative Patent Judge.
DECISION ON APPEAL
Appellant appeals under 35 U.S.C. § 134 from the Examiner's
decision rejecting claims 1, 2, and 12-36. We have jurisdiction under 35
U.S.C. § 6.
We AFFIRM-IN-PART.
1 Infineon Technologies Austria AG is identified as the real party in interest.
App. Br. 2.
Appeal2015-000653
Application 12/239,482
Appellant claims a circuit (as well as a system including such a circuit
and a method of operating such a circuit) comprising a transistor 1, a first
measuring/control circuit 40 for causing the transistor to be switched on and
off under certain current threshold values and a second measuring/control
circuit 40b, parallel to the first measuring/control circuit, for switching off
the transistor faster than the first measuring/control circuit in case of an
emergency if the current is a positive current of an opposite polarity of a
non-positive threshold value (independent claim 1, Figs. 1, 3A; see also
independent claims 12, 15, and 24). Appellant additionally claims a circuit
comprising first and second transistors 1, 2, first and second operational
amplifiers 45, and a shutdown device 48 (independent claim 28, Figs. 1,
3A).
A copy of representative claims 1 and 28, taken from the Claims
Appendix of the Appeal Brief, appears below.
1. A circuit comprising:
at least one transistor, wherein a current that flows from a
first connection to a second connection of the transistor can be
controlled;
at least one first measuring/control circuit for
determining the current and causing the at least one transistor to
be switched on when the current is below and at most up to a
predetermined, non-positive threshold value, and otherwise to
be switched off when the current is above the predetermined,
non-positive threshold value, wherein the at least one first
measuring/control circuit comprises
a current input coupled to the at least one
transistor, and
an amplifier having an amplifier input, an
amplifier output, and a resistance coupled between the
amplifier input and the amplifier output, the amplifier
output producing an output signal that is inverted with
respect to the amplifier input; and
2
Appeal2015-000653
Application 12/239,482
a second measuring/control circuit parallel to the at least
one first measuring/control circuit, the second
measuring/control circuit comprising a second amplifier to
amplify at least a portion of the current input into the at least
one first measuring/control circuit, the second amplifier
connected to a gate of a shutdown device for switching off the
at least one transistor faster than the at least one first
measuring/control circuit in case of an emergency if the current
is a positive current of an opposite polarity of the non-positive
threshold value.
28. A circuit comprising:
a first transistor comprising a drain coupled to a first
external connection and a source coupled to a second external
connection;
a second transistor comprising a drain coupled to the first
external connection and a source coupled to an internal
connection;
a first operational amplifier having a negative input
terminal coupled to the internal connection, and an output
terminal coupled to a gate of the first transistor and a gate of the
second transistor;
a first feedback resistor coupled between the output
terminal of the first operational amplifier and the internal
connection;
a second operational amplifier having a negative input
terminal coupled to the internal connection;
a second feedback resistor coupled between the output
terminal of the second operational amplifier and the internal
connection; and
a shutdown device coupled between the output terminal
of the second operational amplifier and the gate of the first
transistor.
Under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a), the Examiner rejects as unpatentable:
3
Appeal2015-000653
Application 12/239,482
claims 1, 2, 12-21, 28-35 over Ball (US 2005/0218963 Al, pub. Oct.
6, 2005) in view of Raman (US 2008/0048746 Al, pub. Feb. 28, 2008) and
Itoh (US 6,181,186 Bl, iss. Jan. 30, 2001); 2
claims 22 and 23 over Ball, Raman, Itoh and Asada (US 5,936,440,
iss. Aug. 10, 1999);
claims 24 and 36 over Ball in view of Itoh;
claim 25 over Ball, Itoh, and Fujino (US 7,138,778 B2, iss. Nov. 21,
2006); and
claims 26 and 27 over Ball, Raman, Itoh, and Fujino.
In rejecting independent claim 1, the Examiner finds that the circuit of
Ball generally corresponds to the claimed circuit but does not include a
second measuring/control circuit for switching off the transistor faster than a
first measuring/control circuit as required by the claim (Final Action 2-3).
Concerning this deficiency, the Examiner finds that Itoh discloses such first
and second measuring/control circuits (id. at 3) and concludes that it would
have been obvious "to use a second measuring/control circuit parallel to the
first measuring/control circuit as taught by Itoh to protect from a short-
circuit of the load" (id.). The Examiner makes corresponding findings and
conclusions regarding the analogous requirements of independent claims 12,
15, and 24 (id. at 4--7, 12-13).
Appellant argues that Itoh
2 By oversight, claim 30 is not listed in the statement of this rejection (Final
Action 2) but is discussed in the body of the rejection (id. at 11). The
Examiner's oversight is harmless, particularly because Appellant
understands claim 30 is included in this rejection (App. Br. 10).
4
Appeal2015-000653
Application 12/239,482
does not disclose that latch 23 [which the Examiner
identifies as reading on the second measuring/control circuit of
claim 1] turns off transistor Q 1 faster than the at least one first
measuring/ control circuit (which the Examiner identifies a[ s]
reading on comparator 42 shown in Figure 1 of Ball), since Itoh
does not disclose the turnoff speed to be faster in comparison
with any other element and because the Examiner has not
shown that latch 23 operates any faster than comparator 42 of
Ball
(App. Br. 10-11 (underlining and bolding removed)). Appellant presents a
corresponding argument regarding each of independent claims 1, 12, 15, and
24 (id. at 10-13, 15).
The Examiner responds to Appellant's argument as follows:
Itoh ... teaches that when a short[ -]circuit of the load occurs,
the MOSFET Q3 turns on so that the MOSFET Q 1 is turned off
(column 5 lines 34-48, column 6 lines 44-52). When the short-
circuit condition is repaired to a normal state, the positive
voltage is applied to the control terminal G again and the
MOSFET QI turns on to return to normal operation (column 5
lines 49-52). Therefore, Itoh teaches the limitation of switching
off the at least one transistor faster than the at least one first
measuring/control circuit in case of an emergency if the current
is a positive current of an opposite polarity of the non-positive
threshold value.
(Ans. 3).
In reply, Appellant explains that the Examiner's above description of
Itoh relates to the sequence of events that occurs in switching transistor Q 1
off and on rather than the claim feature of a second measuring/control circuit
for switching off the transistor at a rate faster than the first
measuring/control circuit (Reply Br. 2--4).
We agree with Appellant. The Examiner has failed to provide the
record with convincing support for finding that Itoh discloses the claim
5
Appeal2015-000653
Application 12/239,482
feature under review. For this reason, we do not sustain the§ 103 rejections
of independent claims 1, 12, 15, and 24 or the claims which depend
therefrom, namely, claims 2, 13, 14, 16-23, 25-27, and 33-36.
Independent claim 28 does not contain the above discussed limitation.
Rather, this claim defines a circuit comprising first and second operational
amplifiers. In rejecting claim 28, the Examiner determines that these first
and second operational amplifiers correspond to comparator 42 of Ball and
latch 23 of Itoh respectively and concludes that it would have been obvious
to combine these references thereby yielding a circuit having the claimed
operational amplifiers (Final Action 9-10).
Appellant does not contest the Examiner's proposed combination of
Ball and Itoh but instead argues "Ball explicitly teaches element 42 is a
comparator and does not teach that element 42 is an operational amplifier"
(App. Br. 14) and "[l]ikewise, Itoh identifies circuit 23 as a latch and not as
an operational amplifier" (id.).
The deficiency of Appellant's argument is that 1t 1s not accompanied
by any explanatory identification of a structural or functional characteristic
possessed by the claimed operational amplifiers but not possessed by Ball's
comparator and Itoh's latch. The mere fact that claim 28 and the applied
prior art use different names is inadequate to establish that the components
in question differ in structure or function. On the other hand, the structure
and function of these claimed and prior art components appear to be the
same as evidenced by, for example, a comparison of the operational
amplifier 45 shown in Appellant's Figure 1 with the comparator 42 shown in
Ball's Figure 1. While the operational amplifiers disclosed by Appellant
may possess distinctions relative to the comparator and latch of the
6
Appeal2015-000653
Application 12/239,482
references, Appellant does not explicatively identify any requirement in
claim 28 regarding such distinctions.
For these reasons, Appellant fails to show error in the Examiner's
determination that the operational amplifiers of claim 28 are
indistinguishable from the comparator and latch of Ball and Itoh
respectively. We sustain, therefore, the § 103 rejection of independent claim
28. We also sustain the claims which depend from this independent claim,
namely, claims 29-32 because Appellant does not present any additional
separate arguments regarding these dependent claims (see, e.g., App. Br 14).
In summary, we have not sustained the § 103 rejections of claims 1, 2,
12-27, and 33-36 but have sustained the § 103 rejections of claims 28-32.
The decision of the Examiner is affirmed-in-part.
No time period for taking any subsequent action in connection with
this appeal may be extended under 37 C.F.R. § 1.136(a)(l ).
AFFIRivIED-IN-P ART
7