Goodrich Corporation

Patent Trials and Appeals Board

Jan 10, 2022

2021001950 (P.T.A.B. Jan. 10, 2022)

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. 15/368,271 12/02/2016 Brad Hartzler 95600US01-U100-012571 1074 113529 7590 01/10/2022 Kinney & Lange, P.A. 312 South Third Street Minneapolis, MN 55415 EXAMINER PAIK, SANG YEOP ART UNIT PAPER NUMBER 3761 NOTIFICATION DATE DELIVERY MODE 01/10/2022 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): USPatDocket@kinney.com amkoenck@kinney.com PTOL-90A (Rev. 04/07) UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE ____________ BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD ____________ Ex parte BRAD HARTZLER, TOMMY M. WILSON JR., GALDEMIR CEZAR BOTURA, WENPING ZHAO, and ZAFFIR A. CHAUDHRY ____________ Appeal 2021-001950 Application 15/368,271 Technology Center 3700 ____________ Before JOSEPH A. FISCHETTI, MICHAEL C. ASTORINO, and TARA L. HUTCHINGS, Administrative Patent Judges. HUTCHINGS, Administrative Patent Judge. DECISION ON APPEAL STATEMENT OF THE CASE Appellant1 appeals under 35 U.S.C. § 134(a) from the Examiner’s rejection of claims 15, 16, 18, and 19. We have jurisdiction under 35 U.S.C. § 6(b). We REVERSE. 1 We use the term “Appellant” to refer to “applicant” as defined in 37 C.F.R. § 1.42. Appellant identifies Raytheon Technologies Corporation. as the real party in interest. Appeal Br. 2. Appeal 2021-001950 Application 15/368,271 2 CLAIMED INVENTON Claim 15, reproduced below, is the sole independent claim on appeal, and is representative of the claimed subject matter: 15. A carbon nanotube heater assembly comprising: a carbon nanotube heater comprising a carbon nanotube coating applied to a substrate such that the thickness and width of the carbon nanotube coating vary along the substrate to vary the resistance of the carbon nanotube coating along the substrate; a carrier material attached to the carbon nanotube heater; an encapsulating material attached to the carbon nanotube heater opposite the carrier material; and an adhesive layer bonding the encapsulating material to an aircraft part. Appeal Br. 9-10 (Claims App.). REJECTION Claims 15, 16, 18, and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as unpatentable over Zhao (WO 2016/144683 A1, pub. Sept. 15, 2016), Layland (US 2008/0179448 A1, pub. July 31, 2008), and Feng (US 2009/0314765 A1, pub. Dec. 24, 2009).2 ANALYSIS We are persuaded by Appellant’s argument that the Examiner has not adequately shown how one of ordinary skill in the art would combine the teachings of Zhao, Layland, and Feng to arrive at the claimed invention. In rejecting independent claim 15, the Examiner primarily relies on Zhao. 2 We treat the omission of claim 16 in the rejection heading at page 5 of the Final Action as inadvertent error in view of its rejection at page 7. Appeal 2021-001950 Application 15/368,271 3 Final Act. 5-6 (citing Zhao ¶¶ 27, 30, Figs. 2-4). Zhao teaches a heater mat assembly for a rotor blade of a rotary wing aircraft. Zhao ¶ 27. Heater mat assembly 30 is attached to rotor blade 22 of rotary wing aircraft 20. Id. ¶ 26. Figure 3 of Zhao depicts an exploded schematic diagram of heater mat assembly 30. Id. ¶ 27. Heater mat assembly 30 includes the following stacked layers: metal erosion strip 36, adhesive 44, insulating layer 42, heating element 38, and insulating layer 40. Id. ¶¶ 27-28, Fig. 3. Insulating layer 40 is attached to aircraft part 32 (also called innermost layer 32), and heating element 38 is formed between insulating layers 40, 42 so as to separate heating element 38 from outmost layer 36 and innermost layer 32. Id. In one embodiment, heating element 38 is a layer formed from carbon nanotubes. Id. ¶ 29. Adhesive 44 attaches metal erosion strip 36 (also called outermost layer 36) to insulating layer 42. Id. ¶ 28, Fig. 3. The Examiner finds that Zhao’s outermost layer 36 teaches the claimed carrier material, that heating element 38 teaches the claimed carbon nanotube coating, that insulating layers 40 or 42 teach the claimed material attached to the carbon nanotube heater, and innermost layer 32 teaches the claimed aircraft part, as recited in claim 15. Final Act. 5-6. The Examiner acknowledges that Zhao does not teach that heating element 38 is “applied to a substrate.” Id. at 6. However, the Examiner finds that Feng teaches “provid[ing] a carbon nanotube structure (coating) on the surface of a linear supporter (substrate)” when manufacturing carbon nanotube heaters. Id. (citing Feng Fig. 17). The Examiner reasons that it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify Zhao by providing a substrate for Zhao’s heating element 38, as taught by Feng, “in order to provide a support for the heating element 38.” Final Act. 7. Appeal 2021-001950 Application 15/368,271 4 Yet, Zhao’s heating mat assembly 30 is a different structure from Feng’s linear heater 30. Zhao relates to a heating mat assembly for attaching to a rotary blade of a rotary wing aircraft, and Feng discloses a linear heater for twisting about a target like a helix. In particular, Feng teaches with reference to Figure 17 a method for making linear heater 30. Feng ¶ 133. Linear heater 30 is twisted about a target like a helix to heat a target from the outside, or it is inserted into a target to heat the target from the inside. Id. ¶ 132. The method for making linear heater 30 includes “providing a linear supporter,” “making a carbon nanotube structure,” and “fixing the carbon nanotube structure on a surface of the linear supporter.” Id. ¶¶ 133-136, Fig. 17. Given the difference between the Zhao and Feng structures and the different manner they are applied to a target for heating, the Examiner does not sufficiently explain, using evidence and/or technical reasoning, why applying Zhao’s heating element 38 on a substrate in a heating mat assembly would provide a benefit similar to fixing a carbon nanotube structure on a linear supporter for a linear heater to be twisted around a target. We further note that in determining that it would have been obvious to apply Zhao’s heating element 38 to a substrate “in order to provide a support” (Final Act. 7), the Examiner does not identify what type of support (e.g., physical, thermal) would be provided by the substrate to be added, or why such a person of ordinary skill in the art would have determined that such a support would be a desirable addition to Zhao’s heating mat assembly. The Examiner’s reliance on Layland does not cure the deficiency of the Examiner’s reasoning as discussed above. Accordingly, we do not sustain the rejection of independent claim 15 and its dependent claims under 35 U.S.C. § 103. Appeal 2021-001950 Application 15/368,271 5 CONCLUSION In summary: Claims Rejected 35 U.S.C. § References/Basis Affirmed Reversed 15, 16, 18, 19 103 Zhao, Layland, Feng 15, 16, 18, 19 REVERSED