Ex Parte Kamp et al

Patent Trial and Appeal BoardOct 30, 2017

13453712 (P.T.A.B. Oct. 30, 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. 13/453,712 04/23/2012 Josh Kamp 60591US01 9651 87521 7590 11/01/2017 Cantor Colburn LLP - Hamilton Sundstrand 20 Church Street, 22nd Floor Hartford, CT 06103 EXAMINER ROST, ANDREW J ART UNIT PAPER NUMBER 3753 NOTIFICATION DATE DELIVERY MODE 11/01/2017 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): usptopatentmail@cantorcolbum.com PTOL-90A (Rev. 04/07) UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD Ex parte JOSH KAMP, JAY STRADINGER, BRUCE R. SCHRODER, and PETER J. DOWD Appeal 2016-004232 Application 13/453,712 Technology Center 3700 Before JENNIFER D. BAHR, FREDERICK C. LANEY, and SEAN P. O’HANLON, Administrative Patent Judges. O’HANLON, Administrative Patent Judge. DECISION ON APPEAL STATEMENT OF THE CASE Josh Kamp et al. (Appellants)1 appeal under 35 U.S.C. § 134 from the Examiner’s final decision rejecting claims 1—17. We have jurisdiction over this appeal under 35 U.S.C. § 6(b). We AFFIRM. 1 The Appeal Brief identifies Hamilton Sundstrand Corporation as the real party in interest. Br. 2. Appeal 2016-004232 Application 13/453,712 SUMMARY OF THE INVENTION Appellants’ disclosure is directed to the control of butterfly valve positioning. Spec. 11. Claim 1, reproduced below from page 8 (Claims Appendix) of the Appeal Brief, is illustrative of the claimed subject matter:2 1. A butterfly valve comprising: a duct defining a flow pathway; a valve disc rotably disposed in the flow pathway; a pneumatic actuator, the pneumatic actuator including an outer housing surrounding [an] actuator piston that includes an upstream face and a downstream face, the actuator including an upstream chamber, a downstream chamber and an intermediate chamber between the upstream chamber and the downstream chamber and defined by an area between the upstream face, the downstream face and the outer housing, the pneumatic actuator operably connected to the valve disc to drive rotation of the valve disc; and a downstream bleed conduit extending from the flow pathway downstream of the valve disc to the intermediate chamber to pressurize the intermediate chamber thereby reducing a rate of movement of the valve disc in the flow pathway. REJECTIONS3 Claims 1—3 and 8—14 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 102(b) as being anticipated by Fowler (US 2009/0229682 Al, published Sept. 17, 2009). 2 As indicated, it appears that claim 1 is missing an introductory article for the actuator piston. Similarly, it appears that “and” in line two of claim 11 should be “an.” Appellants and the Examiner may wish to correct these informalities in the event of continued prosecution of this application. 3 A rejection of claims 11—17 as being indefinite has been withdrawn. See Final Act. 3; Ans. 6. 2 Appeal 2016-004232 Application 13/453,712 Claims 4, 5, and 15 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as being unpatentable over Fowler and Tseng (US 6,006,780, issued Dec. 28, 1999). Claims 6, 7, 16, and 17 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as being unpatentable over Fowler. ANALYSIS Anticipation Rejection Appellants argue independent claims 1 and 11 together. Br. 5—6. We select claim 1 as representative, treating claim 11 as standing or falling with representative claim 1. See 37 C.F.R. § 41.37(c)(l)(iv). The Examiner finds that Fowler discloses a butterfly valve as recited in claim 1, including, inter alia, a piston including an upstream face (“considered the face that faces the chamber 130”) and a downstream face (“considered the face that faces the chamber through which the linkage extends”), and an intermediate chamber (closing chamber 132) defined by an area between the upstream face, the downstream face, and the actuator housing. Final Act. 4. The Examiner explains that the upstream and downstream faces are on the vertical portions of piston 134 as depicted in Figure 1. Ans. 7—8. Appellants traverse, arguing that the piston faces identified by the Examiner “are opposite faces of the same element, piston 134, with only the material thickness separating them. There is no area or chamber between 3 Appeal 2016-004232 Application 13/453,712 these two faces.”4 Br. 5. Continuing, Appellants assert that “[i]n Fowler, there is no area between the upstream face and the downstream face, thus there is no intermediate chamber as required by [claim 1].” Id. at 5—6. We find Appellants’ arguments unpersuasive for the reasons set forth in the Examiner’s Answer, which we adopt as our own. As explained by the Examiner and as illustrated in Fowler’s Figure 1, closing chamber 132 is between the piston faces identified by the Examiner as corresponding to the recited upstream and downstream faces. Accordingly, we sustain the Examiner’s rejection of independent claims 1 and 11, as well as dependent claims 2, 3, 8—10, and 12—14, which are not argued separately, as being anticipated by Fowler. Obviousness Rejections With respect to the rejection of claims 4—7 and 15—17, Appellants rely only on the arguments discussed above in regard to the rejection of claim 1. Br. 6. Accordingly, for the same reasons as discussed above, we also sustain the Examiner’s rejection of claims 4, 5, and 15 as being unpatentable over Fowler and Tseng and of claims 6, 7, 16, and 17 as being unpatentable over Fowler. DECISION The Examiner’s decision to reject claims 1—17 is affirmed. 4 We note that Appellants seem to misuse the term “area” (a two- dimensional measurement) to mean volume (a three-dimensional measurement). 4 Appeal 2016-004232 Application 13/453,712 No time period for taking any subsequent action in connection with this appeal may be extended under 37 C.F.R. § 1.136(a)(l)(iv). AFFIRMED 5