Ex Parte CHASCSA et al

Patent Trial and Appeal Board

Aug 21, 2018

14487350 (P.T.A.B. Aug. 21, 2018)

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