Ex Parte Allen

Patent Trial and Appeal Board

Sep 23, 2016

13416028 (P.T.A.B. Sep. 23, 2016)

UNITED STA TES p A TENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
APPLICATION NO. FILING DATE FIRST NAMED INVENTOR
13/416,028 03/09/2012 Charles R. ALLEN
23505 7590 09/27/2016
CONLEY ROSE, P.C.
Jonathan M. Harris
1001 Mckinney
Suite 1800
HOUSTON, TX 77002-6417
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.
1787-19309 2880
EXAMINER
LEE, GILBERT Y
ART UNIT PAPER NUMBER
3675
NOTIFICATION DATE DELIVERY MODE
09/27/2016 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):
pathou@conleyrose.com
PTOL-90A (Rev. 04/07)
UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
Ex parte CHARLES R. ALLEN
Appeal2014-009899
Application 13/416,028
Technology Center 3600
Before JOHN C. KERINS, STEP AN ST AI CO VICI, and LEE L. STEPINA,
Administrative Patent Judges.
KERINS, Administrative Patent Judge.
DECISION ON APPEAL
STATEMENT OF THE CASE
Charles R. Allen (Appellant) appeals under 35 U.S.C. § 134(a) from
the Examiner's final decision rejecting claims 1-5. We have jurisdiction
over this appeal under 35 U.S.C. § 6(b).
We REVERSE.
THE INVENTION
Appellant's invention relates to a method of assembling a seal
between flanges.
Appeal2014-009899
Application 13/416,028
Claim 1, the sole independent claim, is representative of the claimed
invention, and reads as follows:
1. A method comprising:
placing a seal ring against a sealing feature of a first
flange;
centering the seal ring with respect to a central passage
through the first flange by adjusting position of a cog integral
with the seal ring; and
coupling a second flange to the first flange with the seal
ring between the flanges, the first and second flanges having
internal bores of substantially the same diameter, and at least
one selected from the group consisting of: different pressure
ratings; and different sealing feature types.
THE REJECTIONS
The Examiner has rejected:
(i) claims 1-3 under 35 U.S.C. § 102(b) as being anticipated by
Ahlstone (US 4, 168,853, issued Sept. 25, 1979); and
(ii) claims 4 and 5 under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as being unpatentable
over Ahlstone.
ANALYSIS
Claims 1-3--Anticipation--Ahlstone
Claim 1 recites, in part, centering the seal ring with respect to a
central passage through the first flange by adjusting the position of a cog that
is integral with the seal ring.
2
Appeal2014-009899
Application 13/416,028
Appellant asserts that "the position of the set screws 3 5 (of Ahlstone)
do not change the centering of the seal ring, as they can only be adjusted to
hold the seal ring after it has been automatically centered by the seal ring's
placement against the wall 24a of the flange 16." Appeal Br. 13 (citing
Ahlstone, col. 5, 11. 23-28). Appellant argues that "tightening any of[] the
set screws 35 against the seal ring would not change the centering of the seal
ring because the seal ring can only move axially from the initial retaining
position. Id. at 14--15 (citing Ahlstone, col. 5, 11. 21-33; Fig. 3).
The Examiner responds that the claims do not "require the centering
of the ring to be completed in a specific manner." Ans. 2. The Examiner
notes that seal 24 of Ahlstone is "centered" because "dog end 37 of element
35 [that] holds the seal 'centered' in position, especially if the flanges are in
a vertical position." Id. at 7 (citing Ahlstone, col. 1, 11. 33-36). The
Examiner concludes that "[a]lthough the seals of the Ahlstone reference are
abutting the wall 22a of the first flange, it does not take away from the fact
that element 37 is in contact with the groove 38 (i.e. holding the seal
centered)." Id. at 8.
Appellant reiterates that "Ahsltone does not 'center the seal ring' by
'adjusting [the] position of a cog integral with the seal ring,"' because "the
seal ring (of Ahlstone) is already in a centered position with respect to the
central passage." Reply Br. 2.
The Examiner incorrectly equates element 35 of Ahlstone holding seal
24 centered to the claimed centering of a seal ring by adjusting the position
of the cog. Specifically, Ahlstone discloses, "the dog end 37 [of element 35]
engages one side wall 39 of the recess 38 to maintain the confronting ring
3
Appeal2014-009899
Application 13/416,028
and flange surfaces 22a and 24a in, or nearly in, engagement." Ahlstone,
col. 5, 11. 24--27 (emphasis added). Claim 1 calls for active centering of the
seal ring by moving (adjusting) the cog, and the term "centering" is not
sufficiently broad to encompass engaging a cog with a seal ring to maintain
or hold its already centered position.
Accordingly, we do not sustain the rejection of claims 1-3 under
35 USC § 102(b) as being anticipated by Ahlstone.
Claims 4 and 5--0bviousness--Ahlstone
The Examiner's position relative to the alleged obviousness of claims
4 and 5 over Ahlstone suffers from the same deficiencies as does the
anticipation rejection of claim 1. As such, the rejection of claims 4 and 5 as
being unpatentable over Ahlstone is not sustained.
DECISION
The decision of the Examiner to reject claims 1-5 is reversed.
REVERSED
4