Ex Parte Gundtoft et al

Patent Trial and Appeal Board

Sep 22, 2016

13467131 (P.T.A.B. Sep. 22, 2016)

UNITED STA TES p A TENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
APPLICATION NO. FILING DATE
13/467, 131 05/09/2012
22116 7590 09/26/2016
SIEMENS CORPORATION
INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY DEPARTMENT
3501 Quadrangle Blvd Ste 230
Orlando, FL 32817
FIRST NAMED INVENTOR
Soeren Gundtoft
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.
2011P01232US 6754
EXAMINER
KENERL Y, TERRANCE L
ART UNIT PAPER NUMBER
2834
NOTIFICATION DATE DELIVERY MODE
09/26/2016 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):
IPDadmin.us@siemens.com
PTOL-90A (Rev. 04/07)
UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
Ex parte SOEREN GUNDTOFT, JEAN LE BESNERAIS, and
HENRIK STIESDAL
Appeal2015-002283
Application 13/467, 131
Technology Center 2800
Before CHUNG K. PAK, CHRISTOPHER C. KENNEDY, and
JENNIFER R. GUPTA, Administrative Patent Judges.
GUPTA, Administrative Patent Judge.
DECISION ON APPEAL
Appellants 1 appeal under 35 U.S.C. § 134(a) from the Examiner's
decision2 finally rejecting claims 1---6 and 8-18. We have jurisdiction under
35 U.S.C. § 6(b).
We reverse.
1 Appellants identify the real party in interest as Siemens Aktiengesellschaft.
Appeal Brief filed June 9, 2014 ("App. Br."), 2.
2 Final Office Action mailed April 9, 2014 ("Final Act.").
Appeal2015-002283
Application 13/467, 131
The claims are directed to a stator arrangement. Claim 1, reproduced
below, is illustrative of the claims on appeal.
1. A stator arrangement for an electric machine, comprising:
a stator having a stator yoke with a plurality of stator slots, with
each stator slot accommodating at least one set of stator
windings, and at least one cooling device in the shape of a duct-
like pipe, wherein the duct-like pipe is divided into a plurality of
separate cooling channels, wherein the inlet and outlet of the
duct-like pipe is disposed on the same axial face side of the stator
yoke.
App. Br. 8 (emphasis added to identify the disputed limitation).
REJECTIONS ON APPEAL
1. Claims 1-3, 5, 6, 8-10, 12, 13, 16, and 17 stand rejected under
35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as unpatentable over Jansen et al.
(US 2007/0103027 Al, published May 10, 2007) (hereinafter
"Jansen") in view of Le Besnerais et al. (US 2012/0112572 Al,
published May 10, 2012) (hereinafter "Besnerais");
2. Claim 4 stands rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as unpatentable
over Jansen and Le Besnerais further in view of Yamaoka et al.
(US 2008/0030081 Al, published Feb. 7, 2008) (hereinafter
"Yamaoka");
3. Claim 11 stands rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as unpatentable
over Jansen and Le Besnerais further in view of de Bock et al.
(US 2011/0221288 Al, published Sept. 15, 2011) (hereinafter
"Bock"); and
4. Claims 14, 15, and 18 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as
unpatentable over Jansen and Le Besnerais further in view of
2
Appeal2015-002283
Application 13/467, 131
Krastchew (US 3,681,628, issued Aug. 1, 1972) (hereinafter
"Krastchew").
ANALYSIS
We will focus on representative independent claim 1 because it
contains the argued limitation and is the broadest claim on appeal.
The Examiner finds that Jansen teaches an electrical machine
comprising a stator 24 (Jansen Fig. 2) having a stator yoke 104 with a
plurality of stator slots, with each stator slot accommodating at least one set
of stator windings 28 (Id. at Fig. 6). Final Act. 3. The Examiner further
finds that Jansen's stator arrangement includes at least one cooling device in
the shape of a duct-like pipe 140 where the duct-like pipe 140 is divided by a
partition wall with two channels (Id. i-f 31; Fig. 8), but does not teach that the
inlet and outlet of the duct-like pipe is disposed on the same axial face side
of the stator yoke. Ans. 2-3; see also Final Act. 3. The Examiner finds that
Besnerais (Besnerais Figs. 2 and 4) teaches the inlet and outlet of the duct-
like cooling pipe being disposed on the same axial face side of the stator
yoke. Ans. 4, 6; see also Final Act. 3. The Examiner finds one of ordinary
skill in the art would have been motivated to modify Jansen's stator so the
inlet and outlet of the duct-like cooling pipe is disposed on the same axial
face side of the stator yoke, as taught by Besnerais, to more efficiently cool
the stator. Final Act. 3.
Appellants argue that Jansen's teaching at paragraph 31, which
defines what is shown in Figure 8, and describes the cooling channel 140 as
being connected in various ways (series, parallel, one or more circuits), does
not teach or suggest that the cooling channels are in the same duct-like pipe
3
Appeal2015-002283
Application 13/467, 131
(i.e., the duct-like pipe is divided into a plurality of cooling channels).
Reply Brief filed November 25, 2014 ("Reply Br.), 2. Appellants' argument
is persuasive. On this record, the Examiner has not explained why Jansen's
description at paragraph 31 indicating that "[ c Joo ling channels 140 may be
connected in a range of series and parallel connections with one or multiple
circuits," should be interpreted as meaning that "the duct-like pipe is divided
into a plurality of separate cooling channels," as required by claim 1. Nor
has the Examiner pointed to any disclosure in Jansen that supports the
proposition that the two cooling channels 140 depicted in Jansen's Figure 8,
divided by a "partition wall," are in the same duct-like pipe. Accordingly,
on this record, we are constrained to reverse the Examiner's obviousness
rejections of claims 1-6 and 8-18.
DECISION
For the above reasons, the rejections of claims 1-6 and 8-18 are
reversed.
REVERSED
4