Ex Parte CHASCSA et alDownload PDFPatent Trial and Appeal BoardAug 21, 201814487350 (P.T.A.B. Aug. 21, 2018) Copy Citation UNITED STA TES p A TENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE APPLICATION NO. FILING DATE 14/487,350 09/16/2014 28395 7590 08/23/2018 BROOKS KUSHMAN P.C./FG1L 1000 TOWN CENTER 22NDFLOOR SOUTHFIELD, MI 48075-1238 FIRST NAMED INVENTOR James Robert CHASCSA II 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. 83465853 7817 EXAMINER TRAN, THIEN S ART UNIT PAPER NUMBER 3742 NOTIFICATION DATE DELIVERY MODE 08/23/2018 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 James Robert Chascsa II and Ishak Zaman 1 Appeal2018-000671 Application 14/487,350 Technology Center 3700 Before: LINDA E. HORNER, CHARLES N. GREENHUT, and ERIC C. JESCHKE, Administrative Patent Judges. GREENHUT, Administrative Patent Judge. DECISION ON APPEAL STATEMENT OF THE CASE Appellants appeal under 35 U.S.C. § 134 from a rejection of claims 1 and 3-19. We have jurisdiction under 35 U.S.C. § 6(b). We reverse. 1 Ford Global Technologies is listed as the applicant. Appeal2018-000671 Application 14/487,350 CLAIMED SUBJECT MATTER The claims are directed to a steering wheel heating system. Claim 1, reproduced below, is illustrative of the claimed subject matter: 1 A heating system for a vehicle steering wheel comprising: a conductive element surrounding a portion of a steering wheel; a power supply configured to provide an input voltage; a transformer connected with the power supply via a first wire and the conductive element via a second wire, a switching element configured to selectively couple the power supply to one of the transformer and the conductive element. REFERENCES The prior art relied upon by the Examiner in rejecting the claims is: Campbell Haag Hazebrouck Petrenko us 4,730,097 us 6,093,908 US 6,268,588 Bl US 2012/0234816 Al REJECTIONS Mar. 8, 1988 July 25, 2000 July 31, 2001 Sept. 20, 2012 Claims 1 and 14--17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable over Hazebrouck and Petrenko. Claims 3, 4, 5 and 6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable over Hazebrouck, Petrenko, and Campbell. Claims 7-13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable over Hazebrouck, Petrenko, and Haag. 2 Appeal2018-000671 Application 14/487,350 Claims 18 and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable over Hazebrouck, Petrenko, and Campbell as evidenced by Electrical Resistance and Conductance2 and American Wire Gauge3. OPINION In all of the rejections before us the Examiner relies on Hazebrouck's switch 24 as being "configured to selectively couple the power supply [i.e., Hazebrouck 31, 3 8] to [] the conductive element [i.e., Hazebrouck 16]" as required by each of the independent claims on appeal, claims 1, 14, and 17. Final Act. 3, 12-13. See, e.g., Application Fig. 4 (depicting Appellant's switching element 165 configured to selectively couple battery 115 (not shown in Fig. 4) to conductive element 140). With regard to Hazebrouck, the Examiner found that "voltage from the power supplies 31, 3 8 flows through converter 18, controller 26, switch 24 and then to the heating element 16 .... The switch 24 [thus] selectively controls whether voltage from the power supply (31, 38) reaches the heating element 16." Ans. 5 (citing Hazebrouck col. 3, 11. 10-13). The exact meaning of the sentence of Hazebrouck cited by the Examiner is not entirely clear: "In this manner, the 42 volts of voltage and the relatively small or low electrical current signal is communicated through the converter 18 to the heating element 16, effective to heat the steering wheel." (col., 3, 11. 10-13). This sentence is inconsistent with the figures and description elsewhere in Hazebrouck. Although this sentence may be amenable to multiple interpretations, the most likely interpretation appears 2 https :// en. wikipedia.org/wiki/Electrical_resistance_and_conductance ( July 7, 2016). 3 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ American_wire_gauge (July 6, 2016). 3 Appeal2018-000671 Application 14/487,350 to be that "through the converter 18" was intended to read "through the clockspring wiring assembly 12," as would be consistent with Figure 1 and the description in claims 1 and 5 of Hazebrouck (col. 3, 11. 47--49; col. 4, 11. 3-5). According to the electrical schematic in Figure 1 of Hazebrouck and the associated description, the controller 26 closes the switch 24, which may be a MOSFET-type switch, via gate terminal 30 by connecting drain terminal 34 to ground via the source terminal 32 to complete the circuit, thereby delivering heat to element 16. Hazebrouck col. 2, 11. 17-24, 54---67; col. 3, 11. 1-22. With such an arrangement current would not flow through gate terminal 30 from the controller 26 to the heater 16. Contrary to what the Examiner found (Ans. 5), the power supply's potential ( of 31, 3 8; e.g., 42V) is always coupled to the heater without going through switch 24. App. Br. 4. Thus the Examiner erred by determining that Hazebrouck's switch 24 is "configured to selectively couple the power supply [i.e., Hazebrouck 31, 3 8] to [] the conductive element [i.e., Hazebrouck 16]." No other references are relied on by the Examiner to cure this deficiency. Accordingly, the rejections before us cannot be sustained on the basis set forth by the Examiner. DECISION The Examiner's rejections are reversed. REVERSED 4 Copy with citationCopy as parenthetical citation