Ex Parte Moon et al

Patent Trial and Appeal BoardMar 12, 2015

12497261 (P.T.A.B. Mar. 12, 2015)

UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE ____________ BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD ____________ Ex parte SANG-CHEOL MOON, HANG-SEOK CHOI, and YOUNG-BAE PARK 1 ____________ Appeal 2013-006126 Application 12/497,261 Technology Center 2800 ____________ Before PETER F. KRATZ, GEORGE C. BEST, and JEFFREY W. ABRAHAM, Administrative Patent Judges. ABRAHAM, Administrative Patent Judge. DECISION ON APPEAL This is a decision on an appeal under 35 U.S.C. § 134 from the decision of the Primary Examiner finally rejecting claims 1 and 5–9. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 35 U.S.C. § 6(b). We affirm. 1 According to the Appeal Brief, the Real Party in Interest is Fairchild Korea Semiconductor Ltd. App. Br. 1. Appeal 2013-006126 Application 12/497,261 2 BACKGROUND Appellants’ claimed invention relates to a switch controller that is said to control switching operation of a power switch, and a converter having a switch controller. Abstract. Claim 1 is illustrative and is reproduced below from the Claims Appendix (App. Br. 8): 1. A switch controller that controls switching operation of a power switch that controls power transmission of a power transfer device that transmits input power to an output terminal, comprising: a feedback information generator that receives an output voltage detection signal corresponding to an output voltage according to power transmitted from the power transfer device, and generates a duty control signal that corresponds to a difference between the output voltage detection signal and a reference signal for controlling the output voltage, wherein the feedback information generator comprises an error amplifier that amplifies a difference between the output voltage detection signal and the reference signal and a gain compensator connected to an output terminal of the error amplifier and compensating a DC gain of a feedback transfer function between the reference signal and the output voltage of the feedback information generator to have a constant value, wherein the gain compensator comprises a first resistor connected to the output terminal of the error amplifier for determining the DC gain of the feedback transfer function and a circuit element that includes at least one capacitor or resistor that extends in parallel to the first resistor; and a duty determining unit that generates information for determining turn-on/off of the power switch by using the duty control signal. Appeal 2013-006126 Application 12/497,261 3 The Examiner maintains, and Appellants appeal, the rejection of claims 1 and 5–9 2 as unpatentable under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) over Fairchild 3 in view of Harriman. 4 Appellants do not separately argue the patentability of any dependent claims, and therefore, claims 5–7 and 9 stand or fall with our analysis of independent claims 1 and 8. Additionally, Appellants rely on the same arguments with regard to the patentability of independent claims 1 and 8. Therefore, we confine our discussion to claim 1, which we select as representative pursuant to 37 C.F.R. § 41.37(c)(1)(iv). OPINION We sustain the above rejection substantially for the reasons expressed in the Examiner’s Answer. The following comments are added for emphasis and completeness. In rejecting claim 1, the Examiner finds that Fairchild discloses a switch controller having nearly all of the requirements of claim 1, including a feedback information generator comprising an error amplifier and a gain compensator. Ans. 5–6. According to the Examiner, Fairchild’s gain compensator is connected to an output terminal of the error amplifier, and comprises a first resistor connected to the output of the error amplifier for 2 Although the Examiner lists claims 2 and 10 among the rejected claims in the Answer (Ans. 4), this appears to be an inadvertent error, as Appellants list these claims as cancelled in the Claims Appendix (App. Br. 8, 10), and the Examiner does not include any substantive discussion of these claims in either the Answer or the Final Action. 3 Fairchild Semiconductor, FAN7528 Dual-Output, Critical Conduction Mode PFC Controller, Rev. 1.0.6 (February 2007). 4 Harriman et al., US 2006/0022658 A1, published Feb. 2, 2006. Appeal 2013-006126 Application 12/497,261 4 determining the DC gain of the feedback transfer function and a circuit element that includes at least one capacitor that extends in parallel to the first resistor. Id. The Examiner recognizes that Fairchild does not specifically disclose compensating a DC gain of a feedback transfer function between the reference signal and the output voltage of the feedback information generator to have a constant value. Id. at 6. The Examiner, however, finds that Harriman discloses a power supply controller comprising a gain compensator (amplifier 55) that compensates a DC gain of a feedback transfer function to have a constant value as required in claim 1. Id. The Examiner determines that it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to modify Fairchild’s switch controller in view of Harriman because Harriman’s power supply controller “accurately changes the value of the output voltage, and . . . maintains stability during the output voltage change.” Id. at 7 (citing Harriman ¶ 3). In the Appeal Brief, Appellants contend that the Examiner relies on the compensation amplifier (55) of Harriman as teaching the gain compensator required in claim 1. App. Br. 5. According to Appellants, the compensation amplifier of Harriman does not include several of the features recited in claim 1, such as “a first resistor connected to the output terminal of the error amplifier for determining the DC gain of the feedback transfer function and a circuit element that includes at least one capacitor or resistor that extends in parallel to the first resistor” or “any circuit element that extends in parallel to a first resistor that is connected to the output terminal of the error amplifier.” Id. at 5–6. As the Examiner points out in the Answer, however, the Examiner does not rely on Harriman as disclosing a gain compensator having the Appeal 2013-006126 Application 12/497,261 5 structural features/configuration recited in claim 1. Instead, the Examiner relies on Fairchild for this, and cites Harriman only for its disclosure of compensating a DC gain of a feedback function to have a constant value. In the Appeal Brief, Appellants do not specifically challenge the Examiner’s findings regarding the structural features/configuration of Fairchild’s gain compensator. Nor do Appellants specifically challenge the Examiner’s finding that Harriman teaches or suggests a DC gain of a feedback function having a constant value. Thus, we find that the Appellants have failed to adequately address the Examiner’s rejection, and have not demonstrated reversible error on the part of the Examiner. In the Reply Brief, Appellants argue for the first time that Harriman does not disclose “compensating a DC gain of a feedback transfer function between the reference signal and the output voltage of the feedback information generator to have a constant value.” Reply Br. 4–5. Because Appellants do not present a showing of good cause as to why this argument was not raised in the Appeal Brief, we will not address this argument. 37 C.F.R. §41.41(b) (2); Ex parte Borden, 93 USPQ2d 1473 (BPAI 2010) (informative opinion). 5 5 Even if we were to consider this argument, we note that Appellants do not address the sentence in ¶ 35 of Harriman that the Examiner relies upon as teaching the “constant value” requirement in claim 1. See Ans. 11; Harriman ¶ 35; Reply Br. 4–5. As a result, Appellants’ arguments would not be persuasive of reversible error. Appeal 2013-006126 Application 12/497,261 6 CONCLUSION For the reasons set forth above, we affirm the Primary Examiner’s final rejection of claims 1 and 5–9 under 35 U.S.C. § 103. No time period for taking any subsequent action in connection with this appeal may be extended under 37 C.F.R. § 1.136(a)(1)(iv). AFFIRMED lp