Ex Parte Kinzl et al

Patent Trial and Appeal BoardAug 22, 2017

13557402 (P.T.A.B. Aug. 22, 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. 13/557,402 07/25/2012 Niklas Kinzl KOA 0341 PUSA (R 1837) 8623 22045 7590 08/24/2017 RROOKS KTTSHMAN P C EXAMINER 1000 TOWN CENTER PAGHADAL, PARESH H TWENTY-SECOND FLOOR SOUTHFIELD, MI 48075 ART UNIT PAPER NUMBER 2847 NOTIFICATION DATE DELIVERY MODE 08/24/2017 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): docketing @brookskushman.com PTOL-90A (Rev. 04/07) UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD Ex parte NIKLAS KINZL, HERWIG RILLING, and KAY-HENDRYK SCHMIDT Appeal 2016-005961 Application 13/557,402 Technology Center 2800 Before PETER F. KRATZ, MONTE T. SQUIRE, JENNIFER R. GUPTA, Administrative Patent Judges. GUPTA, Administrative Patent Judge. DECISION ON APPEAL1 Appellants2 appeal under 35 U.S.C. § 134(a) from the Examiner’s final decision rejecting claims 1—5 and 7—16. We have jurisdiction under 35 U.S.C. § 6(b). We reverse. 1 In this decision, we refer to the Specification filed July 25, 2012 (“Spec.”), the Final Office Action mailed July 13, 2015 (“Final Act.”), the Appeal Brief filed October 30, 2015 (“Appeal Br.”), the Examiner’s Answer mailed May 12, 2016 (“Ans.”), and the Reply Brief filed May 18, 2016 (“Reply Br.”). 2 Appellants identify the real party in interest as Kostal Industrie Elektrik GmbH. Appeal Br. 2. Appeal 2016-005961 Application 13/557,402 The subject matter on appeal relates to an electric device comprising a feedthrough portion of a cable extending into a housing wall. Spec. 12. Specifically, the subject matter on appeal relates to an electric device having a housing and a cable to be installed in the housing; the housing having a pipe bracket disposed on an exterior side of the housing; the pipe bracket having an interior pathway extending from a front end of the pipe bracket farthest from the housing into the interior of the housing; the front surface of the pipe bracket having teeth; the cable having a union nut and a sleeve having a toothed annular surface, where in the installed state, a feedthrough portion of the cable extends through the interior pathway of the pipe bracket and into the interior of the housing, the union nut overlaps the sleeve and presses against the pipe bracket, and the toothed annular surface of the sleeve abuts against the teeth of the pipe bracket. Id. Claims 1 and 12, reproduced below from the Claims Appendix of the Appeal Brief, is representative of the claims on appeal. 1. An electric device comprising: a housing having a pipe bracket, the pipe bracket disposed at one end on the housing and including an interior pathway extending from a free-end of the pipe bracket into the housing, the free-end of the pipe bracket having teeth thereon; and a cable assembly having a cable and a union nut and a sleeve on the cable, the sleeve being an integrally formed component having a crimped section and an annular-shaped section, the crimped section being attached to an outer sheath of the cable such that the sleeve is non-displaceable connected to 2 Appeal 2016-005961 Application 13/557,402 the cable whereby rotational motion and axial displacement of the sleeve with respect to the cable are prevented during both of an installed state of the cable assembly to the housing and an uninstalled state of the cable assembly separated from the housing, the annular shaped section forming a toothed annular surf ace on one side and a flat annular surface on an opposite side, the crimped section being attached to the outer sheath of the cable on the side of the annular shaped section forming the toothed annular surface; wherein in the installed state of the cable assembly to the housing, a feedthrough portion of the cable extends through the interior pathway of the pipe bracket and into the housing with the crimped section of the sleeve being inserted into the interior pathway of the pipe bracket, and the union nut encompasses the annular shaped section of the sleeve and the pipe bracket with the crimped section therein and is attached to the pipe bracket to thereby press the toothed annular surf ace of the annular shaped section of the sleeve against the teeth of the ffee-end of the pipe bracket such that the cable is fixed rotationally to the housing. 12. An electric device comprising: a housing having a pipe bracket, the pipe bracket disposed at one end on the housing and including an interior pathway extending from a ffee-end of the pipe bracket into the housing, the ffee-end of the pipe bracket having teeth thereon; and 3 Appeal 2016-005961 Application 13/557,402 a cable assembly having a cable and a union nut and a sleeve on the cable, the sleeve being an integrally formed component having a crimped section and an annular-shaped section, the crimped section being crimped to an outer sheath of the cable such that the sleeve is non-displaceable connected to the cable and is fixed rotationally and axially in place with respect to the cable during both of an installed state of the cable to the housing and an uninstalled state of the cable separated from the housing, the annular shaped section forming a toothed annular surface on one side and a flat annular surface on an opposite side, the crimped section being attached to the outer sheath of the cable on the side of the annular shaped section forming the toothed annular surface; wherein in the installed state of the cable to the housing, a feedthrough portion of the cable extends through the interior pathway of the pipe bracket and into the housing with the crimped section of the sleeve being inserted into the interior pathway of the pipe bracket, and the union nut encompasses the annular shaped section of the sleeve and the pipe bracket with the crimped section therein and is attached to the pipe bracket to thereby press the toothed annular surface of the annular shaped section of the sleeve against the teeth of the ffee-end of the pipe bracket such that the cable is fixed rotationally to the housing. Appeal Br. 1, 3^4. 4 Appeal 2016-005961 Application 13/557,402 REJECTIONS The Examiner maintains the following rejections on appeal:3 Rejection 1: Claims 1—5, 12, and 13 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as unpatentable over Simon et al. (US 4,436,265, issued March 13, 1984) (“Simon”) in view of Woller et al. (US 2004/0119246 Al, published June 24, 2004) (“Woller”) and Schmitt et al. (US 2008/0176447 Al, published July 24, 2008) (“Schmitt”) (Final Act. 7—16); Rejection 2: Claims 7 and 14 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as unpatentable over Simon in view of Schmitt and Woller, and further in view Dixon et al. (US 7,648,373 B2, issued January 19, 2010) (“Dixon”) (Final Act. 16, 18—19); Rejection 3: Claims 8, 9, 15, and 16 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as unpatentable over Simon in view of Schmitt and Woller, and further in view of Corona et al. (US 7,431,602 B2, issued October 7, 2008) (“Corona”) (Final Act. 16-18, 20-21); and Rejection 4: Claims 10 and 11 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as unpatentable over Simon in view of Schmitt and Woller, and further in view of Werner et al. (US 2005/0054244 Al, published March 10, 2005) (“Werner”) (Final Act. 18-19). 3 The rejections of claims 1—5 and 7—16 under 35 U.S.C. § 112, were withdrawn by the Examiner in the Answer. Ans. 2. 5 Appeal 2016-005961 Application 13/557,402 DISCUSSION Appellants select independent claim 12 as representative of the rejected claims, and thus, we limit our discussion below to claim 12. The Examiner finds that Simon discloses all the elements of an electric device including a crimped section (7 in figure 1 and figure 8) as recited in independent claim 12, but does not disclose (i) “a cable assembly having a union nut” where “the union nut encompasses the annular shaped section of the sleeve and the pipe bracket with the crimped section therein and is attached to the pipe bracket to thereby press the toothed annular surface of the annular shaped section of the sleeve again the teeth of the ffee-end of the pipe bracket such that the cable is fixed rotationally to the housing” and (ii) the sleeve of the cable assembly that is “fixed rotationally and axially in place with respect to the cable during an uninstalled state of the cable separate from the housing.” Final Act. 12—13 (citing Simon 3:29— 33; Figs. 1-3.4 The Examiner finds that Woller discloses a cable assembly having a union nut (1) and a sleeve (5) on the cable (2), the sleeve (5) being an integrally formed component having a crimped section (6) and an annular shaped section (10). Final Act. 14 (citing Woller Figs. 1—2). The Examiner finds that Woller teaches that the union nut (1) encompasses the annular shaped section (10) of the sleeve (5) and the pipe bracket (4) to thereby press the toothed annular surface (11) of the annular shaped section (10) of the sleeve against the teeth (12) of the ffee-end of the pipe bracket (4) such that the cable (2) is fixed rotationally to the housing (3). Id. The Examiner 4 The Examiner inadvertently refers to claim 1 instead of claim 12 on page 12 of the Final Action mailed July 13, 2015 (the action appealed from). 6 Appeal 2016-005961 Application 13/557,402 determines that one of ordinary skill in the art would have been led to use Woller’s arrangement to modify Simon’s device “in order to tightly secure cable in the electric device.” Final Act. 15. Additionally, the Examiner finds that Schmitt discloses that rotational motion and axial displacement of a sleeve with respect to a cable is prevented during both an installed state of the cable to the housing (crimped sleeve 90 in Fig. 3) and an uninstalled state of the cable separated from the housing (crimped sleeve 90 in Fig. 2). Final Act. 15. The Examiner determines that one of ordinary skill in the art would have been led to use Schmitt’s arrangement to modify Simon’s device “in order to tightly secure [the] cable in the electric device.” Id. Appellants argue that the Examiner reversibly erred in finding that Simon teaches or suggests that the flexible extension 7 of Simon’s cable socket (sleeve) has a “crimped section,” and “the crimped section being attached to an outer sheath of the cable such that the sleeve is non- displaceable connected to the cable.” Reply Br. 3; Appeal Br. 14. Although neither Appellants nor the Examiner expressly interpret the claim, we begin our analysis with claim construction. During prosecution, the PTO gives the language 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 any definitions or other enlightenment provided by the written description contained in the applicant’s specification. In re Morris, 127 F.3d 1048, 1054—55 (Fed. Cir. 1997). Appellants’ Specification does not specifically define “crimped,” but a pertinent ordinary meaning of the word “crimped” is “to cause to become 7 Appeal 2016-005961 Application 13/557,402 wavy, bent, or pinched.” Merriam- Webster Online Dictionary, https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/crimped. This definition is consistent with Appellants’ Specification which states that “[t]he crimped section is attached to the cable such that the crimped section is non- displaceable” (Spec. 1 6), and referring to Figure 1 states that “[c]rimping section 10 of sleeve 5 is crimped onto cable 1 by a crimping tool and is thereby fastened to cable sheath 9 such that crimping section 10 cannot be displaced” {id. 128; Fig. 1). Thus, in the context of Appellants’ Specification, the broadest reasonable interpretation of the claim phrase “crimped section” requires that the “crimped” section of the sleeve be “wavy, bent, or pinched,” such that the sleeve connected to the cable is “non-displaceable. ” Simon’s flexible extension 7, which the Examiner finds to be a “crimped section” of the cable socket (sleeve) (Final Act. 12), is shaped as one or a more coils or spirals. Simon 4:41—45; Fig. 1. The Examiner, however, has not established that Simon’s flexible extension 7 is “wavy, bent, or pinched” such that flexible extension 7 is attached to an outer sheath of the cable so that the cable socket connected to cable 19 is “non- displaceable.” Final Act. 12. Woller discloses a sealing device that includes seal 5 having sealing lips 6 and 7 to effect sealing relative to cable 2. Woller 121; Fig. 2. The Examiner finds that Woller’s sealing lip 6 of seal 5 is a “crimped section” within the scope of claim 12. As with Simon, however, the Examiner has not established that Woller’s sealing lip 6 is “wavy, bent, or pinched” so that when sealing lip 6 is connected to cable 2 it is “non-displaceable.” 8 Appeal 2016-005961 Application 13/557,402 Although the Examiner finds that Schmitt discloses a device with “crimped sleeve 90,” (Final Act. 15, citing Schmitt Figs. 2—3), the Examiner has not adequately explained how flexible extension 7 of Simon’s cable socket would be “crimped” without negatively impacting its existing structure and design. Because the Examiner’s rejections all rely on the basic combination of Simon, Woller, and Schmitt (see Final Act. 7—21), we cannot sustain any of the stated rejections. DECISION For the above reasons, the Examiner’s rejections of claims 1—5 and 7— 16 are reversed. REVERSED 9