Ex Parte Hale

Patent Trial and Appeal Board

Nov 28, 2016

13622237 (P.T.A.B. Nov. 28, 2016)

UNITED STA TES p A TENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
APPLICATION NO. FILING DATE
13/622,237 09/18/2012
24041 7590 11/30/2016
SIMPSON & SIMPSON, PLLC
5555 MAIN STREET
WILLIAMSVILLE, NY 14221-5406
FIRST NAMED INVENTOR
Richard John Hale
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.
WYNP106US 1023
EXAMINER
FERGUSON, MICHAEL P
ART UNIT PAPER NUMBER
3679
NOTIFICATION DATE DELIVERY MODE
11/30/2016 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):
patentEFS@idealawyers.com
PTOL-90A (Rev. 04/07)
UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
Ex parte RICHARD JOHN HALE
Appeal2015-000979
Application 13/622,237
Technology Center 3600
Before EDWARD A. BROWN, GEORGE R. HOSKINS, and
BRANDON J. WARNER, Administrative Patent Judges.
BROWN, Administrative Patent Judge.
DECISION ON APPEAL
STATEivIENT OF THE CASE
Richard John Hale (Appellant) 1 appeals under 35 U.S.C. § 134(a)
from the Examiner's decision rejecting claims 1-3 and 6. 2 We have
jurisdiction under 35 U.S.C. § 6(b ).
We AFFIRM.
1 Seminar Components (UK) Limited is identified as the real party in
interest. Br. 3.
2 Claims 4 and 5 have been cancelled. Br. 5.
Appeal2015-000979
Application 13/622,237
CLAIMED SUBJECT MATTER
Claim 1, reproduced below, is representative of the claimed subject
matter.
1. A connector assembly, comprising:
a tang adapted to be secured to a first element; and
a correspondingly shaped channeled bracket adapted to be
secured to a second element, the tang being linearly tapered
bluntly inwardly at a leading end, being substantially parallel in
a mid portion, and being linearly tapered bluntly outwardly at a
remote end opposite from the leading end, wherein the leading
end of the tang is adapted to be received initially within an
outwardly linearly tapering lower end shoulder portion of the
channeled bracket, which thereafter guides the tang into the
channeled bracket up to a limit imposed by the remote end of the
tang as the tang is received within the correspondingly shaped
part of the channeled bracket.
Br. 24 (Claims App.).
REJECTION
Claims 1-3 and 6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as
unpatentable over Wilhelmi (US 4,266,882, issued May 12, 1981) and
Harrer (EP 1602838 A2, published Dec. 7, 2005).
ANALYSIS
Appellant argues the patentability of claims 1-3 and 6 as a group. Br.
11-22. We select claim 1 as representative to decide the appeal, and claims
2, 3, and 6 stand or fall with claim 1. See 37 C.F.R. § 41.37(c)(l)(iv).
Claim 1 calls for a tang "linearly tapered bluntly outwardly at a
remote end opposite from the leading end." Br. 24 (Claims App., emphasis
added). The Examiner finds that Wilhelmi discloses a connector assembly
comprising tang 24 "tapered bluntly outwardly at a remote end A opposite
from the leading end [26]." Final Act. 2; see also id. at 3 (annotated portion
2
Appeal2015-000979
Application 13/622,237
of Figure 7 of Wilhelmi identifying remote end A). The Examiner explains
that the curved-shape of remote end A constitutes a blunt tapered portion,
but determines Wilhelmi does not disclose that outwardly tapered remote
end A is linearly tapered. Id. The Examiner finds that Harrer discloses a
connector assembly comprising tang 11 "linearly tapered bluntly outwardly
at a remote end 13 opposite from a leading end 15." Id. at 3; see Harrer,
Figs. 6-8.
The Examiner determines that it would have been obvious to modify
Wilhelmi to make outwardly tapered remote end A of tang 24 linearly
tapered, as taught by Harrer (Final Act. 3), "to correspondingly mate with
the outwardly ... tapering lower end shoulder portion of the channeled
bracket" (Ans. 6). The Examiner reasons that such a modification of
Wilhelmi would "provide for more secure seating of the tapered remote end
of the tang against the tapering end shoulder portion of the channeled
bracket, providing for a more rigid, secure connection," and would
"prevent[] twisting or relative movement between the tang and the bracket in
a secured position." Final Act. 3--4; Ans. 6-7.
Appellant contends that the teachings of Wilhelmi and Harrer cannot
be combined to prevent relative twisting movement between the tang and
bracket when secured. Appeal Br. 16-17. According to Appellant, the
shape of Wilhelmi' s bracket would have to be altered to correspond to the
shape of element 26, and to the shape of Harrer's element 13, to prevent
such relative twisting. Id. at 17-18. The Examiner responds that Harrer is
not relied upon to teach bodily incorporation of element 13 in Wilhelmi, but
only to teach making the outwardly tapered remote end of Wilhelmi's tang
3
Appeal2015-000979
Application 13/622,237
linearly tapered to mate with the linearly tapering lower end shoulder portion
of its channeled bracket. Ans. 9.
Appellant also contends that the dovetail shape of Harrer' s element 13
is tapered in two planes, and one skilled in the art would not have modified
Wilhelmi's tang with this taper. Br. 19-20. Appellant argues Harrer does
not disclose that the tapered portion of the spring block is included for
preventing twisting or relative movement between the tang and bracket
when in the secured position. Id. at 20. The Examiner responds that
Appellant acknowledges that Harrer teaches that tapered part 13 provides a
more secure connection of the parts of the connector and prevents a
significant range of motion. Ans. 7. The Examiner also determines that
Harrer would provide for prevention of relative movement between the tang
and bracket when in the secured position in the combination. Id.
Figure 7 of Wilhelmi shows nose portion 24 projecting from leading
edge 18 of base portion 12, and a curved transition region between leading
edge 18 and the outside surface of nose portion 24 that is generally straight
and perpendicular to leading edge 18. See also Wilhelmi, col. 4, 11. 21-22.
Figure 7 shows that outward bevel 58 of female member 40 is linear.
Wilhelmi does not, however, appear to disclose that the shape of the
transition region is limited to a curved shape as depicted in Figure 7. We
note Figure 8 of Wilhelmi appears to show correspondence between the
transition region of base portion 12 and outward bevel 58, which is
outwardly linearly tapering, when nose portion 24 is engaged with female
member 40. Harrer teaches the use of shape correspondence between linear
tapered end surfaces in a connector assembly, evidencing that such shape
correspondence of tapered surfaces was known in the art.
4
Appeal2015-000979
Application 13/622,237
Appellant's contentions regarding the Examiner's combination of
teachings of Wilhelmi and Harrer focus substantially on only a portion of the
Examiner's rationale. That is, the Examiner reasons that it would have been
obvious to modify Wilhelmi's remote end to be "linearly tapered bluntly
outwardly" to "provide for more secure seating of the tapered remote end of
the tang against the tapering end shoulder portion of the channeled bracket,
providing for a more rigid, secure connection." Final Act. 3--4; Ans. 6-7.
By matching the shapes of the transition region of base portion 12 and
outward bevel 58 in Wilhelmi, the outwardly tapered remote end of
Wilhelmi' s tang would be linearly tapered so as to correspond with the
outward linearly tapering lower end shoulder portion of the channeled
bracket at outward bevel 58. Claim 1 does not require that elements 26a,
26b of Wilhelmi abut the bracket when the tang and bracket are secured.
Appellant's contentions do not apprise us of any error in the Examiner's
reasoning that the proposed modification of the outwardly tapered remote
end of Wilhelmi would provide for more secure seating of the tapered
remote end of Wilhelmi' s tang against the tapering end shoulder portion of
the channeled bracket at outward bevel 58.
Accordingly, we sustain the rejection of claim 1, and claims 2, 3, and
6, which fall with claim 1, as unpatentable over Wilhelmi and Harrer.
DECISION
We affirm the Examiner's decision to reject claims 1-3 and 6.
No time period for taking any subsequent action in connection with
this appeal may be extended according to 37 C.F.R. § 1.136(a)(l )(iv).
AFFIRMED
5