Ex Parte Sultenfuss et alDownload PDFPatent Trial and Appeal BoardNov 20, 201813779598 (P.T.A.B. Nov. 20, 2018) Copy Citation UNITED STA TES p A TENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE APPLICATION NO. FILING DATE FIRST NAMED INVENTOR 13/779,598 02/27/2013 Andrew T. Sultenfuss 154702 7590 11/23/2018 Zagorin Cave LLP (Dell) 4101 Parkstone Heights Drive Suite 350 Austin, TX 78746 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. DC-101182.01 5908 EXAMINER BROWN, ROBERT D ART UNIT PAPER NUMBER 2835 NOTIFICATION DATE DELIVERY MODE 11/23/2018 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): docket279@atxiplaw.com rholland@atxiplaw.com USPTO@dockettrak.com PTOL-90A (Rev. 04/07) UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD Exparte ANDREW T. SULTENFUSS, TRAVIS C. NORTH, and DEEDER M. AURONGZEB Appeal2018-000284 Application 13/779,598 Technology Center 2800 Before TERRY J. OWENS, MONTE T. SQUIRE, and DEBRA L. DENNETT, Administrative Patent Judges. DENNETT, Administrative Patent Judge. DECISION ON APPEAL 1 STATEMENT OF THE CASE Appellant2 appeals under 35 U.S.C. § 134(a) from a rejection of claims 1, 4--8, 21, 22, and 24--29. We have jurisdiction under 35 U.S.C. § 6(b ). We REVERSE. 1 In our Opinion, we refer to the Specification filed February 27, 2013 ("Spec."); the Final Office Action mailed August 15, 2016 ("Final Act."); the Advisory Action mailed September 15, 2016 ("Adv. Act."); the Appeal Brief filed March 13, 2017 ("Appeal Br."); the Examiner's Answer mailed August 11, 2017 ("Ans."); and the Reply Brief filed October 6, 2017 ("Reply Br."). 2 Appellant is the applicant, Dell Products L.P ., identified as the real party in interest. App. Br. 1. Appeal2018-000284 Application 13/779,598 The claims are directed to information handling systems comprising a housing heat spreader. Claim 1, reproduced below from the Claims Appendix of the Appeal Brief, is illustrative of the claimed subject matter: 1. An information handling system comprising: a housing sized to contain processing components for processing information, at least a portion of the housing having a graphene outer surface coupled to a substrate material, the substrate having inner and outer layers of carbon fiber with an insulative aerogel layer disposed between the inner and outer layers of carbon fiber; and processing components disposed in the housing and operable to process information, the processing components generating thermal energy, the graphene spreading the thermal energy at the outer surface. REFERENCES The Examiner relies on the following prior art in rejecting the claims on appeal: Roscoe et al. ("Roscoe") Kim et al. ("Kim") Waltz US 6,498,731 Bl US 2005/0068738 Al US 2010/0194179 Al REJECTI0NS 3 Dec. 24, 2002 Mar. 31, 2005 Aug. 5,2010 The Examiner maintains and Appellant seeks review of the following rejections under 35 U.S.C. § I03(a): (1) claims 1, 4--7, 21, 22, 24--27, and 29 over Kim in view of Waltz; and (2) claims 8 and 28 over Kim in view of Waltz, and further in view of Roscoe. Final Act. 2-6; App. Br. 2--4. 3 The Office Action Summary of the Final Office Action lists claims 3 and 23 as among the rejected claims. Final Act. 1. However, the Examiner does not address claim 3 or 23 elsewhere in the Final Office Action, or in the Answer. Therefore, we do not consider claims 3 and 23 as rejected. 2 Appeal2018-000284 Application 13/779,598 The Examiner provides a provisional double patenting objection to claims 22-29, should claims 1, 3-8, and 21 be found patentable. Final Act. 6. Objections or other requirements imposed by an Examiner are reviewed by way of a petition to the Director under Rule 181. 3 7 C.F .R. § 1.113 (a); we do not address the Examiner's double patenting objection. OPINION We need address only the broadest claim, claim 1. The Examiner finds that Kim teaches the limitations of claim 1 except for a substrate having inner and outer layers of carbon fiber with an insulative aerogel layer disposed between the inner and outer layers of carbon fiber. Final Act. 2-3. The Examiner finds that Waltz teaches the substrate as claimed. Id. at 3. The Examiner uses the substrate structure taught in Waltz "in place of the simple graphene layer taught by Kim as Waltz's substrate would assist in heat spreading as well as enhancing the structural integrity of the device." Ans. 2. The Examiner states that substitution and combination of equivalents for the same purpose is obvious. Id. Appellant argues that Kim seeks to transfer heat from an interior to an exterior, with no suggestion of combining with an insulative layer. App. Br. 3. Appellant contends that Waltz, in contrast to Kim, discloses an insulating aerogel that prevents heat from transferring through the laminate material to the outer surface. Id. Appellant argues that the Examiner improperly combines the references. Id. at 2. The Examiner fails to establish that the combined references result in the claimed structure. In re Fine, 837 F.2d l 071, 1074 (Fed. Cir. 1988) 3 Appeal2018-000284 Application 13/779,598 ("The PTO has the burden under section I 03 to establish a prima facie case of obviousness .... It can satisfy this burden only by showing some objective teaching in the prior art or that knowledge generally available to one of ordinmy skill in the art would lead that individual to combine the relevant teachings of the references."). Kim concerns a display apparatus, such as an organic light emitting display (OLED), having a heat transfer sheet. Kim Abstract, ,r 5. Figure 12 of Kim is reproduced below: FIG.12 44 49 + 41 Screen Figure 12 shows a schematic view of an organic light emitting display device including a heat transfer sheet including a plurality of pores according to an embodiment of Kim's invention. Id. at ,r 50. A housing 494 may cover at least the organic light emitting layer 45. Id. at ,r 94. A porous heat transfer sheet 44 may be arranged adjacent to a rear surface of the housing, efficiently transmitting heat generated within the OLED to outside the housing. Id. at 95. Waltz is drawn to thermal management composite heat shields. Waltz Abstract. The thermal management system comprises a shield portion and a 4 Throughout this Opinion, for clarity, labels to elements are presented in bold font, regardless of their presentation in the original document. 4 Appeal2018-000284 Application 13/779,598 dissipation portion. Id. Figure 2 of Waltz, illustrating a shield portion of a thermal management system, is reproduced below: , .. , ........................................................................ ·······-·1 COOL SIDE SKIN 108 ! ~--- -- --- --·------------------------------------------------· INSULATION LAYER 106 <<<•<<<<<<•<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<~<<<<<<Copy with citationCopy as parenthetical citation
