Ex Parte Campian

Board of Patent Appeals and Interferences

Dec 13, 2011

10521652 (B.P.A.I. Dec. 13, 2011)

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.
10/521,652 01/14/2005 Jonathon Reo Campian 5772-000004/US/NP 2215
27572 7590 12/14/2011
HARNESS, DICKEY & PIERCE, P.L.C.
P.O. BOX 828
BLOOMFIELD HILLS, MI 48303
EXAMINER
SELLS, JAMES D
ART UNIT PAPER NUMBER
1745
MAIL DATE DELIVERY MODE
12/14/2011 PAPER
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.
PTOL-90A (Rev. 04/07)

UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
________________

BEFORE THE BOARD OF PATENT APPEALS
AND INTERFERENCES
________________

Ex parte JONATHON REO CAMPIAN
________________

Appeal 2010-010013
Application 10/521,652
Technology Center 1700
________________

Before ADRIENE LEPIANE HANLON, TERRY J. OWENS, and
BEVERLY A. FRANKLIN, Administrative Patent Judges.

OWENS, Administrative Patent Judge.

DECISION ON APPEAL
STATEMENT OF THE CASE
The Appellant appeals under 35 U.S.C. § 134(a) from the Examiner’s
rejection of claims 2-12, 22-24, 26, 27, 32, 34-44 and 47-52, which are all of
the pending claims. We have jurisdiction under 35 U.S.C. § 6(b).
The Invention
The Appellant claims a method for forming a body panel. Claim 52 is
illustrative:

Appeal 2010-010013
Application 10/521,652

2
52. A method for forming a body panel by joining of a first metal panel to
a second metal panel, the method comprising:

locating a first metal panel on an upper surface of a lower nest such
that a perimeter region on a first side of said first metal panel is supported on
a generally flat material-contacting area of said frame and an interior region
of said first side engages a pad such that a sealed elongated channel is
formed between said pad and said first metal panel adjacent a portion of said
material-contacting area;

locating a second metal panel on a second side of said first metal
panel opposite said first side;

evacuating said sealed elongated channel to immobilize said first
metal panel on said frame; and

operating a tool across the boundary of said upper surface to said
material-contacting area on said first metal panel to form and flange said
first metal panel over an edge of said second metal panel.

The References
Sawa 5,228,190 Jul. 20, 1993
Veale 5,375,951 Dec. 27, 1994
The Rejection
Claims 47, 48 and 52 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 over Sawa
in view of Veale.1
OPINION
We reverse the rejection. We need to address only claim 52, which is
the sole independent claim. That claim requires locating a panel on an upper
surface of a lower nest such that a perimeter of the panel is supported on a

1 The only rejection of claims 2-12, 22-24, 26, 27, 32, 34-44 and 49-51,
which is a rejection under 35 U.S.C. § 112, first paragraph, written
description requirement, is withdrawn in the Examiner’s Answer (p. 2).
Appeal 2010-010013
Application 10/521,652

3
generally flat material-contacting area and the panel engages a pad so as to
form a sealed elongated channel between the pad and the panel adjacent a
portion of the material-contacting area. For those claim requirements the
Examiner relies upon Veale (Ans. 4).
Veale discloses a vacuum table comprising a bed (11) having
channels (12), raised panels (13) and a hole (14) cut in the bottom of one of
the channels and connected via a vacuum hose (15) to a vacuum system (16)
(col. 2, ll. 45-52; col. 4, ll. 13-19; Fig. 4B). A cover (17) such as a sheet of
plywood having holes (18) therein covers the channels (12) such that when
the vacuum system (16) is operated, a material placed on the cover (17) is
held down by suction in the channels (12) and holes (18) (col. 4, ll. 20-27).
The Examiner relies upon Veale’s bed (11) as corresponding to the
Appellant’s nest and relies upon Veale’s raised panels (13) as corresponding
to the Appellant’s pad (Ans. 7). The Examiner argues: “Material 17 is
placed on top of bed 11 sufficient to cover channels 12. See col. 4, lines 20-
22. This creates the sealed elongated channels in the manner recited in
applicant’s claims” (Ans. 5).
Cover 17 does not create a sealed channel because there are holes (18)
in it. A seal is not created until a material is placed on the cover (17) (col. 4,
ll. 25-27). That material does not meet the Appellant’s claim requirement of
engaging a pad and, therefore, cannot correspond to the Appellant’s first
panel. What the Examiner relies upon as corresponding to the Appellant’s
pad, i.e., Veale’s raised panels (13) (Ans. 7), is engaged by the cover (17),
not by the material placed on the cover (17) (Fig. 4B).
Hence, the Examiner has not established that combining the reference
as proposed by the Examiner results in the Appellant’s claimed method. See
Appeal 2010-010013
Application 10/521,652

4
Uniroyal, Inc. v. Rudkin-Wiley Corp., 837 F.2d 1044, 1052 (Fed. Cir. 1988).
Accordingly, we do not sustain the Examiner’s rejection.
DECISION/ORDER
The rejection of claims 47, 48 and 52 under 35 U.S.C. § 103 over
Sawa in view of Veale is reversed.
It is ordered that the Examiner’s decision is reversed.
REVERSED

ssl