TEXAS INSTRUMENTS INCORPORATED

Patent Trials and Appeals Board

Nov 2, 2020

16023277 - (D) (P.T.A.B. Nov. 2, 2020)

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