Ex Parte Holverson et al

Patent Trial and Appeal BoardAug 14, 2017

13253231 (P.T.A.B. Aug. 14, 2017)

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. 13/253,231 10/05/2011 Todd E. Holverson ITW 60203 2755 23721 7590 08/16/2017 GEORGE R. CORRIGAN CORRIGAN LAW OFFICE 2168 COLLADAY POINT DRIVE STOUGHTON, WI53589 EXAMINER SIMS III, JAMES F ART UNIT PAPER NUMBER 3742 NOTIFICATION DATE DELIVERY MODE 08/16/2017 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): george.corrigan@corrigan.pro gcorrigan@new.rr.com kari.brekke@corrigan.pro PTOL-90A (Rev. 04/07) UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD Ex parte TODD E. HOLVERSON, WILLIAM R. GIESE, DOUGLAS W. KREBS, and KENNETH S. DOBSON Appeal 2016-001905 Application 13/253,231 Technology Center 3700 Before LYNNE H. BROWNE, JILL D. HILL, and JEFFREY A. STEPHENS, Administrative Patent Judges. BROWNE, Administrative Patent Judge. DECISION ON APPEAL STATEMENT OF THE CASE Todd E. Holverson et al. (Appellants) appeal under 35 U.S.C. § 134 from the rejection of claims 1—13. We have jurisdiction under 35 U.S.C. § 6(b). We reverse. Appeal 2016-001905 Application 13/253,231 CLAIMED SUBJECT MATTER The claims are directed to a system for monitoring a weld cell. Sole independent claim 1, reproduced below, is illustrative of the claimed subject matter: 1. A welding system that includes a weld cell related task tracking sensor operatively connected to a welding system controller, whereby the sensor tracks a related task. REFERENCES The prior art relied upon by the Examiner in rejecting the claims on appeal is: Spencer US 2005/0127052 A1 June 16,2005 Blankenship US 2005/0258154 A1 Nov. 24,2005 REJECTIONS1 I. Claims 1 and 7 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 102(b) as anticipated by Blankenship. II. Claims 1, 2, and 6—8 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 102(b) as anticipated by Spencer. III. Claims 2—6 and 8—13 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as unpatentable over Blankenship and Spencer. DISCUSSION Rejection I The Examiner finds that Blankenship discloses all of the limitations of claims 1 and 7. Final Act. 2—3. In particular, the Examiner finds that 1 The rejection of claims 1—13 under 35 U.S.C. § 112, second paragraph, is withdrawn in the Answer. Ans. 7. 2 Appeal 2016-001905 Application 13/253,231 Blankenship teaches “weld cell related task tracking sensor[s] (20, 30, 40).” Final Act. 3. Appellants contend that ‘“a weld cell related task tracking sensor’ is a sensor that tracks weld cell related tasks such as grinding and/or scraping for cosmetics fit up and/or spatter removal, loading parts, unloading parts, looking for parts, moving parts, waiting for parts (from another weld or for delivery), and ordering parts.” Appeal Br. 10. In support of this contention, Appellants direct our attention to the definition of “weld cell” set forth in paragraph 2 of the Specification and the discussion of related tasks in paragraph 4 thereof. See id. Appellants further direct our attention to paragraph 21 of the Specification as describing other related tasks. See id. at 10—11. Thus, it is our understanding the Appellants contest the Examiner’s construction of the claim term “related tasks.” See id. Responding to Appellants’ contentions, the Examiner finds that “[t]he sensors of Blankenship are used to monitor and/or measure the amount of energy consumption by one or more welders over one or more periods of time. Theses sensors of Blankenship are used for the related task of monitoring energy consumption.” Ans. 7—8. In support of these findings, the Examiner directs our attention to paragraph 3 of the Specification. Id. at 8. Paragraph 3 states: Welding can include a tack weld and a final weld. The performance of a weld can include [] time during which the arc is on (arc-on time) and time during which the gun is in hand. In addition to the time-based information of a weld, related weld information includes the weld parameters (current, voltage, process cycle time, ramp rates, etc). 3 Appeal 2016-001905 Application 13/253,231 Spec. 13. Based on this description, the Examiner concludes “that monitoring parameters during a welding process would be considered a related task.” Ans. 8. “[T]he PTO applies to the verbiage of the proposed claims the broadest reasonable meaning of the words in their ordinary usage as they would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art, taking into account whatever enlightenment by way of definitions or otherwise that may be afforded by the written description contained in applicant’s specification.'1'’ In re Morris, 111 F.3d 1048, 1054 (Fed. Cir. 1997) (emphasis added). Although, we agree with the Examiner “that monitoring parameters during a welding process” (Ans. 8) would be understood to be a task related to welding based on the ordinary meaning of those words, the question before us is not what constitutes a weld related task. Rather, the question before us is how the claim language “a related task” would be understood by one skilled in the art reading the Specification. Specifically, would one skilled in the art have understood this language to include tracking of welding tasks or does it refer to tracking of other tasks. The Specification differentiates between welding tasks (described, e.g., in paragraph 3 of the Specification to include time-based information and other “related weld information” such as weld parameters) and “related tasks” (described, e.g., in paragraph 4). The related tasks, as outlined in paragraph 4, are tasks such as grinding, spatter removal, or handling of parts. See Spec. 14. These tasks are performed either before or after welding and do not require the high level of skill required to perform welding. See id. Given these differences between tasks such as monitoring current as described in Blankenship, which occur during welding, and tasks such as grinding, spatter removal, and handling of parts which occur before or after 4 Appeal 2016-001905 Application 13/253,231 welding, one skilled in the art, enlightened by the Specification, would understand that tracking weld related information is not the same as tracking the claimed related tasks. Accordingly, the Examiner’s finding that Blankenship’s weld related tasks read on the claimed related tasks is in error. For this reason, we do not sustain the Examiner’s decision rejecting claims 1 and 7 as anticipated by Blankenship. Rejection II The Examiner finds that Spencer discloses all of the limitations of claims 1, 2, and 6—8. Final Act. 3^4. In particular, the Examiner finds that “Spencer teaches a welding system and a sensor that is used to unobtrusively measure the welding arc parameters (Figure 2, Abstract), wherein tracking the measurements is a related task with respect to the welding process.” Id. at 4. As with the rejection based on Blankenship discussed supra, the Examiner’s finding reads tracking of weld related tasks on the claimed “related tasks.” See id. Accordingly, for the reasons discussed supra, the finding is in error. For this reason, we do not sustain the Examiner’s decision rejecting claims 1, 2, and 6—8 as anticipated by Spencer. Rejection III Claims 2—6 depend from claim 1 and claims 8—13 depend from claim 7. The rejection of these claims relies upon the same erroneous finding pertaining to Blankenship as Rejection I. See Final Act. 5—7. Spencer does not cure this deficiency in Blankenship for the reasons discussed supra. Accordingly, we do not sustain the Examiner’s decision rejecting claims 2—6 and 8—13 as unpatentable over Blankeship and Spencer. 5 Appeal 2016-001905 Application 13/253,231 DECISION The Examiner’s rejections of claims 1—13 are REVERSED. REVERSED 6