Ford Global Technologies, LLC

Patent Trials and Appeals BoardJun 15, 2020

2019005196 (P.T.A.B. Jun. 15, 2020)

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. 14/595,269 01/13/2015 Christopher Wolf 83479453 9492 28395 7590 06/15/2020 BROOKS KUSHMAN P.C./FGTL 1000 TOWN CENTER 22ND FLOOR SOUTHFIELD, MI 48075-1238 EXAMINER SMITH, AARON C ART UNIT PAPER NUMBER 3665 NOTIFICATION DATE DELIVERY MODE 06/15/2020 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 CHRISTOPHER WOLF and MICHAEL W. DEGNER Appeal 2019-005196 Application 14/595,269 Technology Center 3600 ____________ Before JOSEPH A. FISCHETTI, NINA L. MEDLOCK, and KENNETH G. SCHOPFER, Administrative Patent Judges. SCHOPFER, Administrative Patent Judge. DECISION ON REQUEST FOR REHEARING Appellant1 requests rehearing of the decision entered April 3, 2020 (“Decision”), which affirmed the Examiner’s rejection of claims 9–11, 13, 15–17, 22, and 23 under 35 U.S.C. § 103. Appellant contends that we misapprehended or overlooked certain arguments and evidence related to the rejection of the independent claims. Req. Reh’g 2–3. As discussed below, we find no point of law or fact that we overlooked or misapprehended in arriving at our Decision. 1 We use the word “Appellant” to refer to “applicant” as defined in 37 C.F.R. § 1.42. Appellant identifies the real party in interest as Ford Global Technologies, LLC. Appeal Br. 2. Appeal 2019-005196 Application 14/595,269 2 DISCUSSION Appellant argues that the Decision ignores an explanation provided in the briefs regarding Appellant’s argument that the proposed combination would render Holman unsatisfactory for its intended purpose. Req. Reh’g 2. We disagree. In the Decision, we quoted the extent of Appellant’s argument on this point. Decision 3–4. We further found that the Appeal Brief did not adequately explain what Holman’s intended purpose is, and once properly defined, how it would be incompatible with the combination proposed by the Examiner. Id. at 4. We also note that the Appeal Brief did not explain adequately how the quoted portion of Holman related to Appellant’s argument. Thus, we adequately addressed the extent of Appellant’s argument as it was presented in the briefs. Appellant now provides emphasis in the quoted portion of Holman and further explanation regarding why the proposed combination would render Holman unsatisfactory for its intended purpose. Yet, Appellant provides no explanation as why such was not previously provided. Based on the record before us, we are not persuaded that the Decision ignored, misapprehended, or overlooked any point of law or fact that was timely raised. CONCLUSION We have carefully reviewed the original Decision in light of Appellant’s request, but we find no point of law or fact that we overlooked or misapprehended in arriving at our decision. Therefore, Appellant’s request for rehearing is denied. Appeal 2019-005196 Application 14/595,269 3 Outcome of Decision on Rehearing: Claims Rejected 35 U.S.C. § Basis/Reference(s) Granted Denied 9, 10, 13, 15 103 Holman, Poon 9, 10, 13, 15 11, 16 103 Holman, Poon, Kawano 11, 16 17 103 Holman, Poon, Rosén 17 22 103 Holman, Poon, Official Notice 22 23 103 Holman, Poon, Ostrick 23 Overall Outcome 9–11, 13, 15–17, 22, 23 Final Outcome of Appeal After Rehearing: Claims Rejected 35 U.S.C. § Basis/Reference(s) Affirmed Reversed 9, 10, 13, 15 103 Holman, Poon 9, 10, 13, 15 11, 16 103 Holman, Poon, Kawano 11, 16 17 103 Holman, Poon, Rosén 17 22 103 Holman, Poon, Official Notice 22 23 103 Holman, Poon, Ostrick 23 Overall Outcome 9–11, 13, 15–17, 22, 23 Appeal 2019-005196 Application 14/595,269 4 DENIED