Ex Parte Chaut

Patent Trial and Appeal Board

Aug 9, 2016

12962675 (P.T.A.B. Aug. 9, 2016)

UNITED STA TES p A TENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
APPLICATION NO. FILING DATE
12/962,675 12/08/2010
44696 7590 08/11/2016
DR MARK M, FRIEDMAN
Moshe Aviv Tower, 54th Floor, 7 J abotinsky St.
Ramat Gan, 5252007
ISRAEL
FIRST NAMED INVENTOR
Yaron Chaut
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.
1267/2 1346
EXAMINER
KA YES, SEAN PHILLIP
ART UNIT PAPER NUMBER
2833
NOTIFICATION DATE DELIVERY MODE
08/11/2016 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):
patents@friedpat.com
friedpat.uspto@gmail.com
rivka_f@friedpat.com
PTOL-90A (Rev. 04/07)
UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
Ex parte Y ARON CHAUT
Appeal2014-005219
Application 12/962,675
Technology Center 2800
Before TERRY J. OWENS, KAREN M. HASTINGS, and
JULIA HEANEY, 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 1-11, 21, 22 and 24. We have jurisdiction under
35 U.S.C. § 6(b).
The Invention
The Appellant claims a clock. Claim 1 is illustrative:
1. A clock comprising:
(a) a time measuring mechanism; and
(b) a plurality of electronic display areas for
displaying a passage of time measured by said time
measuring mechanism, at least one of said display areas
being configured to activate progressively more or less of
the display area in direct proportion to the passage of
Appeal2014-005219
Application 12/962,675
one hour of time such that after one hour it becomes
either completely activated or completely deactivated,
whereby a partial hour is displayed by at least one
display area being partially activated while a complete
hour is displayed by at least one display area being
either completely activated or completely deactivated.
Johnson
Emami
The References
us 4,007 ,583
US 6,628,571 B2
Feb. 15, 1977
Sep.30,2003
Tokyoflash Japan, 3x3 LED Watch Design, at
http://www.tokyoflash.com/blog/2010/11/3x3-led-watch-design/ (Nov. 4,
2010) (hereinafter Tokyoflash).
The Rejections
The claims stand rejected as follows: claims 1, 4, 6, 21, 22 and 24
under 35 U.S.C. § 102(b) over Emami, claims 1, 3, 5 and 22 under
35 U.S.C. § 102(a) over Tokyoflash, claims 2 and 7-11 under
35 U.S.C. § 103 over Emami in viev,r of Johnson and claims 3 and 5 under
35 U.S.C. § 103 over Emami in view ofTokyoflash.
OPINION
We affirm the rejections.
The Appellant argues the claims as a group and does not argue the
rejections under 35 U.S.C. § 103 (Br. 4--7). We therefore limit our
discussion to one claim, i.e., claim 1. Claims 2-11, 21, 22 and 24 stand or
fall with that claim. See 37 C.F.R. § 41.37(c)(l)(iv) (2012).
Emami discloses a watch (2) comprising a clockface (3) having three
adjacent groups (31-33) of display means ( 4) such as 1) luminous elements
activated or deactivated by switches, 2) liquid crystal display elements
2
Appeal2014-005219
Application 12/962,675
activated or deactivated by contrast change, or 3) shutter elements (8, 81)
activated or deactivated by mechanical change of position (col. 1, 11. 9-11;
col. 2, 1. 35 - col. 3, 1.2; Fig. la). The central display group (32) has five
display means ( 4) which indicate the tens digit of the minute number (0 to 5)
such that each hour, the central display group (32) goes from being
completely deactivated to completely activated and back to completely
deactivated (or vice versa). (col. 3, 11. 56---60; Fig. lb).
Tokyoflash discloses a watch comprising a 3x3 light emitting diode
(LED) lower left quadrant which indicates the tens digit of the minute
number (0 to 5) such that each hour, that quadrant goes from being
completely activated to partially deactivated and back to completely
activated (or vice versa) (pp. 1-3).
The Appellant argues that the Appellant's display area differs from
each of Emami' s display means ( 4) and each of the nine LEDs in
Tokyoflash's 3x3 lower left quadrant because each of them is either
completely activated or deactivated whereas the Appellant's recited at least
one display area is a single display unit or element which, each hour,
transitions from appearing unfilled to partially filled to completely filled and
back to unfilled (Br. 4---6).
"' [D]uring examination proceedings, claims are given their broadest
reasonable interpretation consistent with the specification."' In re
Translogic Tech. Inc., 504 F.3d 1249, 1256 (Fed. Cir. 2007) (quoting In re
Hyatt, 211F.3d1367, 1372 (Fed. Cir. 2000)). The Appellant's Specification
states that "[ e Jach display area 5 is implemented in a non-limiting,
exemplary embodiment, as an electronic display screen configured to
display an image that progressively fills an electronic display area 5 at a rate
3
Appeal2014-005219
Application 12/962,675
corresponding to the passage of one hour of time as tracked by timing
circuitry 3" (Spec. 8:10-23).
Thus, the Appellant improperly interprets the claim term "display
area" overly narrowly as being limited to a non-limiting, exemplary
embodiment. The broadest reasonable interpretation of the Appellant's
claim term "display area" consistent with the Specification, therefore,
encompasses Emami's watch's central display group (32) and Tokyoflash's
watch's lower left quadrant because, as indicated above, they meet the
Appellant's claim 1 's requirement that more or less of the display area is
activated in direct proportion to the passage of one hour such that after one
hour it becomes either completely activated or completely deactivated.
The Appellant, therefore, has not indicated reversible error in the
rejections.
DECISION/ORDER
The rejections of claims 1, 4, 6, 21, 22 and 24 under
35 U.S.C. § 102(b) over Emami, claims 1, 3, 5 and 22 under
35 U.S.C. § 102(a) over Tokyoflash, claims 2 and 7-11 under
35 U.S.C. § 103 over Emami in view of Johnson and claims 3 and 5 under
35 U.S.C. § 103 over Emami in view ofTokyoflash are affirmed.
It is ordered that the Examiner's decision is affirmed.
No time period for taking any subsequent action in connection with
this appeal may be extended under 37 C.F.R. § 1.136(a).
AFFIRMED
4