10696517 (B.P.A.I. Mar. 29, 2011)

Ex Parte Gade et al

Board of Patent Appeals and InterferencesMar 29, 2011

10696517 (B.P.A.I. Mar. 29, 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. 10/696,517 10/29/2003 Prasad V. Gade 39803-00083 6380 59582 7590 03/29/2011 DICKINSON WRIGHT PLLC 38525 WOODWARD AVENUE SUITE 2000 BLOOMFIELD HILLS, MI 48304-2970 EXAMINER MANCHO, RONNIE M ART UNIT PAPER NUMBER 3664 MAIL DATE DELIVERY MODE 03/29/2011 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 PRASAD V. GADE, SANJIV G. TEWANI, and THOMAS A. BAUDENDISTEL ____________ Appeal 2009-012051 Application 10/696,517 Technology Center 3600 ____________ Before MICHAEL W. O’NEILL, STEFAN STAICOVICI, and KEN B. BARRETT, Administrative Patent Judges. O’NEILL, Administrative Patent Judge. DECISION ON APPEAL STATEMENT OF THE CASE Prasad V. Gade et al. (Appellants) appeal under 35 U.S.C. § 134 from the Examiner’s decision rejecting claims 24-30 and 38-46 under 35 U.S.C. § 102 (b) as anticipated by Takano (US 5,060,919, issued Oct. 29, 1991). We have jurisdiction under 35 U.S.C. § 6(b). We REVERSE. Appeal 2009-012051 Application 10/696,517 2 The Invention Claim 24, reproduced below, is illustrative of the subject matter on appeal. 24. A method for controlling a hydraulic mount between an object and a base, the object having a bounce resonance frequency, the method comprising: calibrating at least one tunable parameter of a control system of the mount based on the bounce resonance frequency of the object; generating a first acceleration signal indicative of an acceleration of the object; generating a second acceleration signal indicative of an acceleration of the base; determining a relative acceleration across the mount based on the first and second acceleration signals; generating a control signal responsive to the determined relative acceleration based on the at least one tunable parameter; and controlling the flow of MR mount fluid in the mount responsive to the control signal to minimize the relative acceleration across the mount over a predetermined band of frequencies. OPINION We disagree with the Examiner’s position that the viscosity of the mount is the recited “at least one tunable parameter of a control system.” See Ans. 5 and 8. The viscosity of the electrorheologic fluid of the mount is not a parameter of Takano’s control system, i.e., differentiation circuit 86, 88; discrimination circuit 84; and pulse generating circuit 82. See Takano, fig. 1. Appeal 2009-012051 Application 10/696,517 3 CONCLUSION Based on the foregoing, we cannot sustain the Examiner’s rejection of claims 24-30 and 38-46 under 35 U.S.C. § 102 (b) as anticipated by Takano. DECISION The Examiner’s decision to reject claims 24-30 and 38-46 with Takano is reversed. REVERSED Klh