Multivac Sepp Haggenmüller SE & Co. KG

Patent Trials and Appeals Board

Feb 11, 2022

2021004983 (P.T.A.B. Feb. 11, 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. 16/472,474 06/21/2019 Elmar EHRMANN MULT0209PUSA 1016 22045 7590 02/11/2022 Brooks Kushman 1000 Town Center 22nd Floor Southfield, MI 48075 EXAMINER ROCHE, JOHN B ART UNIT PAPER NUMBER 2184 NOTIFICATION DATE DELIVERY MODE 02/11/2022 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): docketing@brookskushman.com kdilucia@brookskushman.com PTOL-90A (Rev. 04/07) UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE ________________ BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD ________________ Ex parte ELMAR EHRMANN, CHRISTIAN LAU, THOMAS PFALZER, FLORIAN FELCH, CLAUS BOTZENHARDT, ANDREAS KURZ, MICHAEL RÄDLER, and THROSTEN REMMELE ________________ Appeal 2021-004983 Application 16/472,474 Technology Center 2100 ________________ Before JEAN R. HOMERE, CARL W. WHITEHEAD JR., and BRADLEY W. BAUMEISTER, Administrative Patent Judges. BAUMEISTER, Administrative Patent Judge. DECISION ON APPEAL Appellant appeals under 35 U.S.C. § 134(a) from the Examiner’s final rejection of claims 18-37.1 Appeal Br. 3-15. Claims 1-17 are cancelled. Claims App. We have jurisdiction under 35 U.S.C. § 6(b). Oral argument was held on February 4, 2022. A transcript of the proceeding will be added to the record in due course. We reverse. 1 “Appellant” refers to “applicant” as defined in 37 C.F.R. § 1.42. Appellant identifies the real party in interest as MULTIVAC SEPP HAGGENMÜLLER SE & CO. KG. Appeal Brief 1, filed March 11, 2021 (“Appeal Br.”). Appeal 2021-004983 Application 16/472,474 2 CLAIMED SUBJECT MATTER Appellant describes the claimed subject matter as follows: In a packaging machine, a work station has an interior, which is surrounded by a wall and which has arranged therein a tool with at least one heating element or actor. The invention is characterized by a bus node assembly that is attached to the outside of the wall facing away from the interior and which comprises a housing cap, a circuit board and an interface connected to the circuit board and used for connection to a communication bus. Spec. Abstr. Independent claim 18, reproduced below, illustrates the subject matter of the appealed claims: 18. A packaging machine comprising a work station having an interior, which is surrounded by a wall and which has arranged therein a tool having one of at least one heating element or at least one actor, wherein an outside of the wall facing away from the interior has attached thereto a bus node assembly comprising the following: a housing cap; at least one circuit board populated with electronic components; and an interface connected to the at least one circuit board and used for connection to a communication bus; wherein the bus node assembly is configured to at least one of provide one or more items of information on the tool or receive control data for the tool via the interface. Appeal Br., Claim Appx. 1. Appeal 2021-004983 Application 16/472,474 3 STATEMENT OF THE REJECTIONS Claims 18 and 32 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 102(a)(1) as anticipated by Korz (EP 1 440 886 A1; published July 28, 2004). Final Act. 3. Claims 19-23 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as being unpatentable over Korz and Pruemm (US 9,266,721 B2; issued Feb. 23, 2016). Final Act. 4-6. Claims 24-26, 30, and 33 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as being unpatentable over Korz and Loeffel (US 2015/0028730 A1; published Sept. 17, 2015). Final Act. 6-7. Claims 27-29 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as being unpatentable over Korz and Iwahashi (US 2015/0264772 A1; published Sept. 17, 2015). Final Act. 7-8. Claim 31 stands rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as being unpatentable over Korz and Waller (US 2012/0278610 A1; published Nov. 1, 2012). Final Act. 9. Claim 34 stands rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as being unpatentable over Korz and Rakib (US 2004/0172658 A1; published Sept. 2, 2004). Final Act. 9-10. Claims 35-37 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as being unpatentable over Korz, Loeffel, and Iwahashi. Final Act. 10-12. DETERMINATIONS AND CONTENTIONS Regarding the anticipation rejection of claim 18, the Examiner finds that Korz discloses, inter alia, a bus node assembly that is attached to an outer wall of a work station and that the bus node assembly comprises a Appeal 2021-004983 Application 16/472,474 4 housing cap. Final Act. 3 (citing Korz ¶ 12, ll. 1-6). Appellant argues that Korz does not anticipate independent claim 18 because, inter alia, “Korz . . . does not disclose a housing cap of a bus node assembly.” Appeal Br. 3. According to Appellant, paragraph [0012] of Korz seems to disclose that, with the invention of that reference, operators can be taught that safety- related commands can only be triggered by a machine operating device, with which, in particular, movements in the machine such as closing a lid or a cover or starting of corresponding motors and gears can be carried out, so that the operator is particularly careful, especially with this machine operating device. There is no disclosure in Korz that such a lid or cover is part of a bus node assembly. Id. In the Examiner’s Answer mailed June 25, 2021 (“Ans.”), the Examiner further clarifies, [Korz’s disclosure] shows that the closing cover could be determined to be part of the internal and external components of the system in that the hole which the cover closes is part of the system, and the cover could be inside the system or on the outside of the system. Ans. 13. STANDARD OF REVIEW The Board conducts a limited de novo review of the appealed rejections for error based upon the issues identified by Appellant, and in light of the arguments and evidence produced thereon. Ex parte Frye, 94 USPQ2d 1072, 1075 (BPAI 2010) (precedential). Appeal 2021-004983 Application 16/472,474 5 ANALYSIS Paragraph 12 of the Korz, as contained within the only machine translation of the German document that is of record, reads as follows: Machine translation of Korz, p. 29, filed June 21, 2019. Google’s translate tool translates the original German text of Korz, as follows: This measure according to the invention can be used to teach the operating personnel that safety-relevant commands can only be triggered by a machine operating device, with which, in particular, movements in the machine such as closing a cover or covering or starting corresponding ones engines and gears are executable so that the operator is particularly careful with this machine operating device. Korz ¶ 12, as translated by the Google translate tool ((available at https:// www.google.com/search?q=google+translate+german+to+english&rlz= 1C1GCEB_enUS773US773&oq=google+translate&aqs=chrome.1. 69i57j0i67j0i131i433i512l3j0i433i512j0i131i433i512j0i512j0i67i433j0i271 .3246j0j1&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8). We agree with Appellant (Appeal Br. 3) that the partial translation of Korz ¶ 12, as contained in the present record, does not sufficiently disclose a housing cap for a bus node assembly that is attached to the outside of a work-station wall, as claimed. Nor does the Google machine translation of Korz ¶ 12 teach the arrangement of a housing cap, as claimed, either. Moreover, the Examiner does not provide any further factual basis or evidence to support the assertion that Korz discloses this feature. Ans. 13. In fact, by stating that Korz’s disclosure “shows that the closing cover could Appeal 2021-004983 Application 16/472,474 6 be determined to be part of the internal and external components of the system in that the hole which the cover closes is part of the system, and the cover could be inside the system or on the outside of the system” (id.) (emphasis added), the Examiner appears to be acknowledging that Korz does not expressly or inherently teach the limitation, as claimed. We understand the Examiner’s position to be, instead, that one or ordinary skill having read Korz’s disclosure merely would have understood that such an arrangement would have been possible. That is, the Examiner, at best, sets forth a basis for why one of ordinary skill would have found the disputed claim limitation to have been obvious in light of Korz, but not a basis for finding that Korz discloses every claim limitation expressly or inherently. “Inherency . . . may not be established by probabilities or possibilities. The mere fact that a certain thing may result from a given set of circumstances is not sufficient.” In re Robertson, 169 F.3d 743, 745 (Fed. Cir. 1999) (citations and internal quotation marks omitted). For the foregoing reasons, Appellant persuades us that the Examiner has not established a prima facie case that Korz anticipates independent claim 18. Accordingly, we reverse the rejection of that claim and of claim 32, which depends from claim 18.2 Regarding the remaining rejections of claims 19-31 and 33-37, the Examiner does not rely on any of the additionally cited references to cure the deficiency of the anticipation rejection explained above. Final Act. 4-12. 2 Because the question before us on appeal is whether Korz anticipates claim 18 under 35 U.S.C. § 102(a)(1), we do not reach any determinations as to whether Korz may render claim 18 obvious under 35 U.S.C. § 103. Appeal 2021-004983 Application 16/472,474 7 Accordingly, we reverse the obviousness rejections of these claims for the reasons set forth in relation to claim 18. DECISION SUMMARY In summary: REVERSED Claims Rejected 35 U.S.C. § Basis Affirmed Reversed 18, 32 102(a)(1) Korz 18, 32 19-23 103 Korz, Pruemm 19-23 24-26, 30, 33 103 Korz, Loeffel 24-26, 30, 33 27-29 103 Korz, Iwahashi 27-29 31 103 Korz, Waller 31 34 103 Korz, Rakib 34 35-37 103 Korz, Loeffel, Iwahashi 35-37 Overall Outcome 18-37