Ex Parte Cote et al

Patent Trial and Appeal BoardNov 29, 2018

13186929 (P.T.A.B. Nov. 29, 2018)

UNITED STA TES p A TENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE APPLICATION NO. FILING DATE 13/186,929 07/20/2011 23280 7590 12/03/2018 Davidson, Davidson & Kappel, LLC 589 8th A venue 16th Floor New York, NY 10018 FIRST NAMED INVENTOR Kevin Lauren Cote 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. 6003.1161 5246 EXAMINER ROYSTON, JOHN M ART UNIT PAPER NUMBER 2855 NOTIFICATION DATE DELIVERY MODE 12/03/2018 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): ddk@ddkpatent.com PTOL-90A (Rev. 04/07) UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD Ex parte KEVIN LAUREN COTE and LOTHARJOHNSCHROEDER Appeal2017---011246 Application 13/186,929 Technology Center 2800 Before TERRY J. OWENS, CHRISTOPHER L. CRUMBLEY, and DEBRA L. DENNETT, Administrative Patent Judges. DENNETT, Administrative Patent Judge. DECISION ON APPEAL 1 STATEMENT OF THE CASE Appellants2 appeal under 35 U.S.C. Â§ 134(a) from a final rejection of claims 1---6, 8-10, 12, 13, 15-18, and 20-22. We have jurisdiction under 35 U.S.C. Â§ 6(b). We REVERSE. 1 In our Opinion, we refer to the Specification filed July 20, 2011 ("Spec."); the Final Office Action mailed September 8, 2016 ("Final Act."); the Advisory Action mailed February 2, 2017 ("Adv. Act."); the Appeal Brief filed March 6, 2017 ("App. Br."); the Examiner's Answer mailed July 3, 2017 ("Ans."); and the Reply Brief filed August 29, 2017 ("Reply Br."). 2 Appellants identify Goss International Americas, Inc. as the real party in interest. App. Br. 2. Appeal2017---011246 Application 13/186,929 The invention is related to printing presses, which utilize a virtual master to provide proper commands to various press components. Spec. ,r 2. According to applicants, the virtual master signal does not compensate for real-time press activity, meaning no drive has information about how the other drives are operating. Id. at ,r 13. The invention employs a modified virtual master signal that compensates for variations in the web or press components and any resulting changes in print to cut register and alignment. Id. at ,r 14. Claim 1, reproduced below from the Claims Appendix of the Appeal Brief, is illustrative of the claimed subject matter: 1. A web printing press comprising: at least one printing unit printing images on a web; at least one press component in direct contact with the webÂ· ' a cutting device for cutting the web into sheets; a controller transmitting a virtual master signal to the at least one printing unit and at least one press component; a sensor sensing the at least one press component or directly sensing the web downstream of the at least one print unit and generating a sensor signal; and a processor receiving the sensor signal and the virtual master signal, the processor transmitting a modified virtual master signal to the cutting device as a function of the received sensor signal; the cutting device cutting the web into sheets as a function of the modified virtual master signal; wherein the at least one printing unit, the at least one press component, and the cutting device are each driven by a different motor. 2 Appeal2017---011246 Application 13/186,929 REFERENCES The Examiner relies on the following prior art in rejecting the claims on appeal: Jackson us 5,894,802 Apr. 20, 1999 Elkotbi et al. US 6,837,159 B2 Jan.4,2005 ("Elkotbi") Rugamer US 2005/0284316 Al Dec. 29, 2005 Nobukawa et al. US 2006/0005722 Al Jan. 12,2006 ("N obukawa") Piefer et al. US 2006/0267529 Al Nov. 30, 2006 ("Piefer") Hahn US 2008/0105153 Al May 8, 2008 Ollivier et al. US 2008/0148980 Al June 26, 2008 ("Ollivier") REJECTIONS The Examiner maintains and Appellants seek review of the following rejections: 1. Claim 1 under 35 U.S.C. Â§ I02(b) as anticipated by Rugamer; 2. Claims 2, 10, 13, 15-18, and 20-22 under 35 U.S.C. Â§ I03(a) as obvious over Rugamer in view of Piefer; 3. Claim 3 under 35 U.S.C. Â§ I03(a) as obvious over Rugamer in view of Hahn; 4. Claim 4 under 35 U.S.C. Â§ I03(a) as obvious over Rugamer in view of Ollivier; 5. Claim 5 under 35 U.S.C. Â§ I03(a) as obvious over Rugamer as modified by Ollivier, and further in view of Piefer; 6. Claim 6 under 35 U.S.C. Â§ I03(a) as obvious over Rugamer in view ofNobukawa; 7. Claim 8 under 35 U.S.C. Â§ I03(a) as obvious over Rugamer in view of Elkotbi; 3 Appeal2017---011246 Application 13/186,929 8. Claim 9 under 35 U.S.C. Â§ I03(a) as obvious over Rugamer in view of Jackson; and 9. Claim 12 under 35 U.S.C. Â§ I03(a) as obvious over Rugamer as modified by Piefer, and further in view of Jackson. Final Act. 2-23; App. Br. 5-14. OPINION The dispositive issue in this appeal is whether Rugamer discloses the claimed "modified virtual master signal." See App. Al of App. Br. All of the pending claims, whether to an apparatus or method, require a modified virtual master signal. See id. at Al--4. We first determine the meaning of the claim term in order to assess accurately whether Rugamer anticipates or renders obvious one or more claims. Oakley, Inc. v. Sunglass Hut Int'!, 316 F.3d 1331, 1339 (Fed. Cir. 2003) ( explaining that anticipation and obviousness require comparison of the properly construed claims to the available prior art); Amazon.com, Inc. v. Barnesandnoble.com, Inc., 239 F.3d 1343, 1351 (Fed. Cir. 2001) ("Only when a claim is properly understood can a determination be made ... whether the prior art anticipates and/or renders obvious the claimed invention."). During prosecution, claims are given their broadest reasonable scope consistent with the specification. In re Am. A cad. of Sci. Tech. Ctr., 367 F.3d 1359, 1364 (Fed. Cir. 2004). The words used in a claim must be read in light of the specification, as it would have been interpreted by one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention. Id. After review of the claims and Specification, we determine that "modified virtual master signal" means a virtual master signal that is 4 Appeal2017---011246 Application 13/186,929 modified by the processor as a result of a sensor generating a signal and providing the sensor signal to the processor. Claim 1 recites that a controller transmits a virtual master signal to the at least one printing unit and at least one press component; a sensor senses the at least one press component or directly senses the web downstream of the at least one print unit and generates a sensor signal; a processor receives the sensor signal and the virtual master signal, and transmits a modified virtual master signal to the cutting device as a function of the received sensor signal; and the cutting device cuts the web into sheets as a function of the modified virtual master signal. Thus, a virtual master signal exists and is transmitted and is subsequently modified in response to a sensor on a press component or directly on the web. See Spec. ,r,r 5 ("The processor transmits a modified virtual master signal to the cutting device as a function of the received sensor signal."); 7 ("The method includes the steps of printing a web using a printing unit receiving a virtual master signal, acting on the printed web with at least one press component receiving the virtual master signal, determining a deviation between the virtual master signal and an actual characteristic of the at least one press component and modifying the virtual master signal for a further press component downstream of the at least one press component as a function of the deviation."); 8 ("The processor may compare the actual velocity of the at least one press component or the actual velocity of the web downstream of the at least one press component with the virtual master signal and may provide the modified virtual master signal to compensate for any undesired variations."); 14: ("A virtual master signal is sent to the cut cylinder and may be modified 5 Appeal2017---011246 Application 13/186,929 as desired to compensate for undesired roll motions or press/web variations."). The Examiner finds that Rugamer teaches a signal of phase position