12956792 (P.T.A.B. Feb. 28, 2017)

Ex Parte Fujii et al

Patent Trial and Appeal BoardFeb 28, 2017

12956792 (P.T.A.B. Feb. 28, 2017)

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. 12/956,792 11/30/2010 Hiroshi Fujii Q121237 9994 23373 7590 03/02/2017 SUGHRUE MION, PLLC 2100 PENNSYLVANIA AVENUE, N.W. SUITE 800 WASHINGTON, DC 20037 EXAMINER BOATENG, ALEXIS ASIEDUA ART UNIT PAPER NUMBER 2859 NOTIFICATION DATE DELIVERY MODE 03/02/2017 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): PPROCESSING@SUGHRUE.COM sughrue@sughrue.com USPTO@sughrue.com PTOL-90A (Rev. 04/07) UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD Ex parte HIROSHI FUJII and NOZOMU KAMIOKA Appeal 2015-004424 Application 12/956,792 Technology Center 2800 Before BRUCE R. WINSOR, LINZY T. McCARTNEY, and MELISSA A. HAAPALA, Administrative Patent Judges. HAAPALA, Administrative Patent Judge. DECISION ON APPEAL This is a decision on appeal under 35 U.S.C. § 134(a) from a final rejection of claims 1—5. We have jurisdiction under 35 U.S.C. § 6(b). An oral hearing was conducted on February 15, 2017.1 We reverse. 1 A transcript of the oral hearing will be forthcoming. Appeal 2015-004424 Application 12/956,792 EXEMPLARY CLAIM Claim 1 is exemplary of the subject matter on appeal: 1. A vehicle charging apparatus comprising: an electric generator that is driven by an internal combustion engine and outputs an adjustable alternating-current voltage; a rectifier that converts the outputted alternating-current voltage to a direct-current voltage; an electric storage device that is charged with the converted direct-current voltage; a voltage sensor that measures an output voltage of the rectifier; and a control device that controls the electric generator for a charging voltage to be a target charging voltage calculated from the output voltage in order to suppress a charging current to be lower than a charging current upper limit value when the electric storage device is charged. REJECTION ON APPEAL Claims 1—5 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 102(e) as being anticipated by Ichikawa (US 2009/0315403 Al; published Dec. 24, 2009). ISSUES Appellants’ contentions present us with the following dispositive issue: Did the Examiner err in finding Ichikawa discloses a control device that controls the electric generator for a charging voltage to be a target charging voltage calculated from the output voltage (“control device” limitation), as recited in independent claim 1? 2 Appeal 2015-004424 Application 12/956,792 ANALYSIS The Examiner finds Ichikawa discloses the “control device” limitation recited in claim 1. Final Act. 1 (citing Ichikawa 202—203); Ans. 3^4 (citing Ichikawa 117, 137, 139, 140, 146). Specifically, the Examiner finds Ichikawa discloses the ECU (Electronic Control Unit) generates target voltage and determines whether voltage is above or below this limit. Ans. 3. The Examiner further finds Ichikawa discloses the ECU controls the voltage supplied from the generators as it is output from the converters. Id. The Examiner also finds whether the power supplies are in charging mode or discharging mode, then the ECU acts accordingly. Id. Appellants contend Ichikawa fails to disclose a control device that controls the electric generator as claimed. App. Br. 10—11; Reply Br. 4—5. Appellants argue Ichikawa is silent regarding ECU controlling an electric generator, but instead describes ECU is used to interface with converters and ECU calculates drive signals to control inverters. App. Br. 11. Appellants further argue Ichikawa describes voltage values are used for determining state of charge of power storage devices, which are used by ECU to calculate drive signals used to control convertors, not the electric generator. Reply Br. 5. We agree with Appellants. The cited sections of Ichikawa describe ECU generates target voltages used to control converters 8-1 and 8-2. See Ichikawa 139—140, 146—147. The Examiner maps the claimed electric generator to the motor generator depicted in item 34-1 of Figure 1 (Final Act. 2), and maps the recited “output voltage” to voltage sensors 12-1, 12-2, and 18 (Ans. 2—3). But, the Examiner does not find, nor do the cited sections of Ichikawa disclose, that ECU (controller) controls the motor 3 Appeal 2015-004424 Application 12/956,792 generator (electric generator) for a charging voltage to be a target charging voltage calculated from voltage sensors 12-1, 12-2, or 18 (output voltage), as required by the disputed limitation. For the foregoing reasons, Appellants persuade us the Examiner has not established Ichikawa discloses the “control device” limitation recited in independent claim 1. Accordingly, we do not sustain the 35 U.S.C. § 102(e) rejection of claim 1 and its dependent claims 2—5. DECISION We reverse the Examiner’s decision to reject claims 1—5. REVERSED 4