Ex Parte Kobayashi et al

Patent Trial and Appeal BoardMar 24, 2016

13413219 (P.T.A.B. Mar. 24, 2016)

UNITED STA TES p A TENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE APPLICATION NO. FILING DATE FIRST NAMED INVENTOR 13/413,219 03/06/2012 Koichi Kobayashi 38834 7590 03/28/2016 WESTERMAN, HATTORI, DANIELS & ADRIAN, LLP 1250 CONNECTICUT A VENUE, NW SUITE 700 WASHINGTON, DC 20036 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. 091156A 1008 EXAMINER WEEKS, GLORIA R ART UNIT PAPER NUMBER 3721 NOTIFICATION DATE DELIVERY MODE 03/28/2016 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): patentmail@whda.com PTOL-90A (Rev. 04/07) UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD Ex parte KO I CHI KOBAYASHI and T AKASHI MORI Appeal2014-001832 Application 13/413,219 Technology Center 3700 Before JOSEPH A. FISCHETTI, NINA L. MEDLOCK, and CYNTHIA L. MURPHY, Administrative Patent Judges. MURPHY, Administrative Patent Judge. DECISION ON APPEAL The Appellants 1 appeal under 35 U.S.C. Â§ 134 from the Examiner's rejection of claims 1 and 2. We have jurisdiction over this appeal under 35 U.S.C. Â§ 6(b). We AFFIRM. 1 "The real party in interest" is "SANYO Electric Co., Ltd." (Appeal Br. 2.) Appeal2014-001832 Application 13/413,219 STATEMENT OF THE CASE The Appellants' invention "relates to a tablet supply apparatus having a function of filling tablets into a container such as a bag, a bin, or the like." (Spec. 1.) Illustrative Claim2 1. A tablet supply apparatus comprising: a main body having a case accommodating unit at the upper portion thereof; plural tablet cases provided in the case accommodating unit, each of the tablet cases having tablets accommodated therein; a hopper provided at the lower side of the tablet case in the main body; a filling apparatus for filling tablets received by the hopper into a container; and a tablet feeder that is mounted at an upper portion of a front panel constituting the main body to be horizontally long and discharges tablets put therein to the hopper, wherein the tablet feeder has plural cells that have upwardly-facing open portions and are arranged on a line side by side as a cell array so as to be freely movable along the arrangement direction thereof while tablets are accommodated in each of the cells, the upwardly-facing open portions being arranged so as to intercommunicate with the outside of the main body so that the tablets are allowed to be put into the cells from the outside of the main body with the main body being closed, and a discharge portion that is disposed at one end portion of the cell array and discharges tablets in a cell reaching the one end portion into the hopper. 2 This illustrative claim is quoted from the Claims Appendix ("Claims App.") set forth on pages 7-8 of the Appeal Brief. 2 Appeal2014-001832 Application 13/413,219 Rejection The Examiner rejects claims 1 and 2 under 35 U.S.C. Â§ 103(a) as unpatentable over Kim '699 (US 6,170,699 Bl issued Jan. 9, 2001) and Kim '921 (US 6,449,921 Bl issued Sept. 17, 2002). (Final Action 2.) ANALYSIS Independent claim 1 is directed to an apparatus comprising "a tablet feeder" that is mounted "to be horizontally long and discharges tablets put therein to [a] hopper." (Claims App.) Independent claim 1 also requires this tablet feeder to have "plural cells" that are "arranged on a line side by side as a cell array." (Id.) The Examiner finds, and the Appellants do not dispute, that Kim '699 discloses an apparatus comprising a tablet feeder 10 that is mounted horizontally and that discharges tablets to a hopper. (See Final Action 2; see also Kim '699, Fig. 7.) The Examiner also finds, and the Appellants also do not dispute, that the tablet feeder 10 is a linear tablet feeder having cells arranged on a line side by side as a cell array. (Id.) Independent claim 1 additionally requires the tablet feeder's cells to "have upwardly-facing open portions." (Claims App.) The Examiner finds, and the Appellants do not dispute, that the cells of linear tablet feeder 10 have upwardly-facing open portions. (See Final Action 2; see also Kim '699 Fig. 7.) Independent claim 1 further requires the cells' upwardly-facing open portions to be "arranged so as to intercommunicate with the outside of [a] main body so that the tablets are allowed to be put into the cells from the outside of the main body with the main body being closed." (Claims App.) The Examiner finds, and the Appellants do not dispute, that Kim' 921 discloses tablet-holding containers having upwardly facing open portions 3 Appeal2014-001832 Application 13/413,219 arranged so as to intercommunicate with the outside of a main body. (See Final Action 3; see also Kim '921 Figs. 1, 4.) In other words, Kim'921 teaches "outside access to the tablet feeders." (Answer 4.) The Examiner determines that it would have been obvious, in view of the teachings of Kim '921, "to modify the apparatus of Kim '699 to include an arrangement that permits communication between the cells and the outside of the main body." (Final Action 3.) The Examiner explains that this modification involves "the addition of an arrangement of upward facing cells that are in communication with the outside of the main body as taught by Kim '921." (Answer 4.) The Examiner further explains that Kim '921 teaches that "[such a modification] permits the communication between the cells and the outside of the main body." (Final Action 3.) The Appellants argue that "[t]he Examiner has not explained how one of ordinary skill in the art would have combined Kim '699 and Kim '921 to result in the claimed invention." (Appeal Br. 4.) We are not persuaded by this argument because, as indicated above, the Examiner explains that the combination involves arranging the upwardly facing cells of the linear tablet feeder 10 so that the open tops of these cells are in communication with the outside of the main body. (See Answer 4.) The Appellants also argue that the Examiner's combination of the prior art would necessarily result in the modified apparatus "includ[ing] the turntable 14 of Kim '921." (Appeal Br. 4; see also Reply Br. 2.) We are not persuaded by this argument because the Examiner's rejection does not involve replacing the linear tablet feeder 10 with any of the components described or depicted by Kim '921. The Examiner's rejection involves rearranging the linear tablet feeder 10, in view of the teachings of Kim '921, 4 Appeal2014-001832 Application 13/413,219 so that its upward facing cells are in communication with the outside of the main body. For example, the prior art linear tablet feeder 10 can be arranged horizontally adjacent the hopper on an upper portion of a front panel as diagramed by the Examiner. (See Answer 4.) The Appellants further argue that the Examiner's proposed modification "would destroy the function of Kim '699." (Appeal Br. 5.) We are not persuaded by this argument because Kim '699 teaches that its tablet feeder 10 can be disposed in different positions relative to other parts of the overall apparatus. (See Kim '699, col. 4, 11. 48-54.) We fail to see why, and the Appellants do not adequately address why, the Examiner's proposed repositioning of the linear tablet feeder 10 would destroy the ability of Kim '699 to perform as a "tablet dispensing system." (Id. at col. 1, 11. 7-8.) For these reasons, we are not persuaded by the Appellants' position that the Examiner errs in determining that the apparatus recited in independent claim 1 would have been obvious over Kim '699 and Kim '921. Thus, we sustain the Examiner's rejection under 35 U.S.C. Â§ 103(a). Dependent claim 2 is not argued separately, so it falls with independent claim 1. DECISION We AFFIRM the Examiner's rejection of claims 1 and 2. No time period for taking any subsequent action in connection with this appeal may be extended under 37 C.F.R. Â§ 1.136(a)(l )(iv). AFFIRMED. 5