4 ms·
Both the patent and the finding of patent infringement are a bit more complicated than that. In order for a finding of patent infringement, one or more claims
by herniatedeel 8y ago
Both the patent and the finding of patent infringement are a bit more complicated than that.
In order for a finding of patent infringement, one or more claims of the patent must be infringed.
Claim 1 recites:
A multiple supply voltage device comprising:
a core network operative at a first supply voltage;
and
a control network coupled to said core network wherein said control network is configured to transmit a control signal, said control network comprising: an up/down (up/down) detector configured to detect a power state of said core network;
processing circuitry coupled to said up/down detector and configured to generate said control signal based on said power state;
one or more feedback circuits coupled to said up/down detector, said one or more feedback circuits configured to provide feedback signals to adjust a current capacity of said up/down detector;
at least one first transistor coupled to a second supply voltage, the at least one more first transistor being configured to switch on when said first supply voltage is powered down and to switch off when said first supply voltage is powered on;
at least one second transistor coupled in series with the at least one first transistor and coupled to said first supply voltage, the at least one second transistor being configured to switch on when said first supply voltage is powered on and to switch off when said first supply voltage is powered down;
at least one third transistor coupled in series between the at least one first transistor and the at least one second transistor.
- tyingq 8y agoThat's what I paraphrased, other than it involves 3 transistors wired in a way that accomplishes that.
- jcranmer 8y agoIf you don't have 3 transistors wired in a way that accomplishes that, you don't violate the patent. (Actually, at least 2 transistors, the other two independent claims cover cases where you replace the third transistor with something else). You don't violate a patent by violating a loose summary of the patent, you have to specifically violate the claims in full.
- jacobolus 8y agoOr in pictures, this circuit is the prior art: https://patentimages.storage.googleapis.com/c5/d0/e9/e4eedeb6301ee9/US08063674-20111122-D00001.png https://patentimages.storage.googleapis.com/c5/d0/e9/e4eedeb... And these circuits are what they are patenting: (a) https://patentimages.storage.googleapis.com/91/c4/35/775214e652f766/US08063674-20111122-D00005.png https://patentimages.storage.googleapis.com/91/c4/35/775214e... (b) https://patentimages.storage.googleapis.com/a1/66/be/985aac1ff331a3/US08063674-20111122-D00006.png https://patentimages.storage.googleapis.com/a1/66/be/985aac1... (c) https://patentimages.storage.googleapis.com/a8/93/45/09b4add8cd9097/US08063674-20111122-D00007.png https://patentimages.storage.googleapis.com/a8/93/45/09b4add...
- tyingq 8y agoYes. I'm claiming that's not novel. I wouldn't try and patent a 2 stage amp with an optional 3rd stage either.