TEXAS INSTRUMENTS INCORPORATEDDownload PDFPatent Trials and Appeals BoardNov 2, 20202020000136 (P.T.A.B. Nov. 2, 2020) Copy Citation UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE 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 APPLICATION NO. FILING DATE FIRST NAMED INVENTOR ATTORNEY DOCKET NO. CONFIRMATION NO. 16/023,277 06/29/2018 Anant Shankar Kamath TI-72857B 5219 23494 7590 11/02/2020 TEXAS INSTRUMENTS INCORPORATED P O BOX 655474, MS 3999 DALLAS, TX 75265 EXAMINER SHIN, JEFFREY M ART UNIT PAPER NUMBER 2849 NOTIFICATION DATE DELIVERY MODE 11/02/2020 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): uspto@ti.com PTOL-90A (Rev. 04/07) UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD Ex parte ANANT SHANKAR KAMATH and SREERAM N S Appeal 2020-000136 Application 16/023,277 Technology Center 2800 Before TERRY J. OWENS, CATHERINE Q. TIMM, and MERRELL C. CASHION, JR., Administrative Patent Judges. OWENS, Administrative Patent Judge. DECISION ON APPEAL STATEMENT OF THE CASE Pursuant to 35 U.S.C. § 134(a), Appellant1 appeals from the Examiner’s decision to reject claims 1 and 4. We have jurisdiction under 35 U.S.C. § 6(b). We REVERSE. 1 We use the word “Appellant” to refer to “applicant” as defined in 37 C.F.R. § 1.42. Appellant identifies the real party in interest as Texas Instruments Incorporated (Appeal Br. 2). Appeal 2020-000136 Application 16/023,277 2 CLAIMED SUBJECT MATTER The claims are directed to a digital isolator. Claim 1, reproduced below, is illustrative of the claimed subject matter: 1. An output circuit for use in an isolation device, the output circuit comprising: a filter circuit including: a filter input; a filter output; a first resistor coupled between the filter input and an output ground node; a capacitor coupled between the filter input and the filter output; and a second resistor coupled between the filter output and an output supply node; and a demodulation circuit coupled to the filter output. REFERENCE The prior art relied upon by the Examiner is: Name Reference Date Kobayashi US 2010/0073137 A1 Mar. 25, 2010 REJECTION Claims 1 and 4 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 102(b) over Kobayashi. OPINION Claim 1 is the sole independent claim. That claim requires: 1) a filter circuit (220) including a filter input (240A/240B), a filter output (242A, 242B), a first resistor (510A, 510B) coupled between the filter input and an output ground node, a capacitor (512A, 512B) coupled between the filter input and the filter output, and a second resistor (514A, 514B) coupled Appeal 2020-000136 Application 16/023,277 3 between the filter output and an output supply node (VDD2) (Fig. 5), and 2) a demodulation circuit (224) coupled to the filter output (Fig. 2). Kobayashi discloses “a semiconductor device [100] which can transmit and receive data to and from a reader/writer without interruption of operation by a transmission signal to the reader/writer” (¶ 20). The semiconductor device (100) comprises a logic circuit (106) which receives a signal from a demodulation signal generation circuit (202) comprising a first demodulation circuit (502), a first bias circuit (506), a comparator (510), and an output portion (514) (¶¶ 64, 92, 93; Fig. 6). The first bias circuit (506) comprises an input (800A), an output (808A), a capacitor (802A) between the input (800A) and output (808A), a first resistor (804A) between a power supply potential (VDD) and the capacitor (802A)’s output end, and a second resistor (806A) between the capacitor (802A)’s output end and a reference potential (VSS) (¶ 104; Fig. 9). The first bias circuit (506) receives input from the first demodulation circuit (502), and outputs to the comparator (510)’s first input portion (900A) (¶¶ 93, 108; Fig. 10). The comparator (510) outputs to the demodulation signal generation circuit (202)’s output portion (514) (¶ 93; Fig. 6). The Examiner has the initial burden of establishing a prima facie case of anticipation by pointing out where all of the claim limitations appear, either expressly or inherently, in a single reference. See In re Spada, 911 F.2d 705, 708 (Fed. Cir. 1990); Corning Glass Works v. Sumitomo Elec. U.S.A., Inc., 868 F.2d 1251, 1255–56 (Fed. Cir. 1989); In re King, 801 F.2d 1324, 1327 (Fed. Cir. 1986). Appeal 2020-000136 Application 16/023,277 4 The Examiner finds that Kobayashi’s first bias circuit (506) corresponds to the Appellant’s filter circuit (220), and that Kobayashi discloses “a demodulation circuit coupled to the filter output (502/504 is electrically coupled to the filter output through the filter)” (Final Rej. 3). “‘[D]uring examination proceedings, claims are given their broadest reasonable interpretation consistent with the specification.’” In re Translogic Tech. Inc., 504 F.3d 1249, 1256 (Fed. Cir. 2007) (quoting In re Hyatt, 211 F.3d 1367, 1372 (Fed. Cir. 2000)). The Appellant’s Specification states that “[t]he filter circuit 220 of the output circuit 204 generates filtered modulated differential data signals (242A and 242B)” (¶ 33), and that “demodulator 224 is configured to detect a presence of the carrier signal 234 in the modulated differential data signals (242A and 242B)” (id.). The Examiner does not establish that merely because Kobayashi’s first bias circuit (506)’s input is electrically connected to its output, the broadest reasonable interpretation of the Appellant’s claim limitation “a demodulation circuit coupled to the filter output” in view of the Appellant’s Specification encompasses Kobayashi’s demodulation circuit (502) coupled to the first bias circuit (506)’s input. Thus, the Examiner has not established a prima facie case of anticipation by Kobayashi of the Appellant’s claimed output circuit. CONCLUSION The Examiner’s rejection is reversed. Appeal 2020-000136 Application 16/023,277 5 DECISION SUMMARY In summary: Claims Rejected 35 U.S.C. § Reference(s)/Basis Affirmed Reversed 1, 4 102(b) Kobayashi 1, 4 REVERSED Copy with citationCopy as parenthetical citation