Ex parte Hansen

Board of Patent Appeals and Interferences

Apr 30, 2002

09016245 (B.P.A.I. Apr. 30, 2002)

The opinion in support of the decision being entered today was not
written for publication and is not binding precedent of the Board.
Paper No. 23
UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
_____________
BEFORE THE BOARD OF PATENT APPEALS
AND INTERFERENCES
_____________
Ex parte HAROLD L. HANSEN
_____________
Appeal No. 2000-0423
Application No. 09/016,245
______________
ON BRIEF
_______________
Before HAIRSTON, JERRY SMITH, and BLANKENSHIP, Administrative
Patent Judges.
HAIRSTON, Administrative Patent Judge.
DECISION ON APPEAL
This is an appeal from the final rejection of claims 1,
2 and 5 through 16.
The disclosed invention relates to a timing circuit and
to a software controlled timer that connects/disconnects power
to an apparatus at a preselected time.
Claims 1 and 11 are illustrative of the claimed
invention, and they read as follows:
Appeal No. 2000-0423
Application No. 09/016,245
2
1. An apparatus comprising:
a scanner;
an exposure lamp in the scanner;
a computer;
an electrical-power-control circuit
connected to the computer, an electrical-
power source, and the exposure lamp; and
a software program running on the computer,
the software program providing instructions
to the electrical-power-control circuit to
connect electrical power from the
electrical-power source to the exposure
lamp at a preselected time.
11. An apparatus comprising:
a scanner;
an exposure lamp in the scanner;
a timing circuit; and
an electrical-power-control circuit
connected to an electrical-power source,
the timing circuit, and the exposure lamp.
The reference relied on by the examiner is:
Tung 5,636,040 Jun.
3, 1997
Claims 1, 2 and 5 through 16 stand rejected under 35
U.S.C. § 102(e) as being anticipated by Tung.
Appeal No. 2000-0423
Application No. 09/016,245
3
Reference is made to the briefs (paper numbers 14 and 16)
and the answer (paper number 15) for the respective positions
of the appellant and the examiner.
OPINION
As indicated supra, all of the claims on appeal require
either a timing circuit (claims 11 through 16) or a computer
controlled timer that connects/disconnects power to an
apparatus at a preselected time (claims 1, 2 and 5 through
10). Appellant argues (brief, pages 4 and 5) that the Tung
control circuit is not used as a timing circuit or to connect
or disconnect electrical power to the lamp 136. According to
appellant (brief, pages 3 and 4), “Tung uses the value of the
physical parameter (i.e., the intensity of the lamp output) TO
ADJUST, NOT TURN ON OR OFF, the level of power to the lamp in
order to ‘adjust the intensity of the light 119 irradiated by
the lamp 136' (see Tung col. 3, lines 4-5).” We agree. The
examiner’s contentions (answer, page 7) to the contrary
notwithstanding, the software program running on computer 15
in Tung does not provide any instructions to the
microprocessor 114 “to connect electrical power from the power
Appeal No. 2000-0423
Application No. 09/016,245
4
source 130 to an exposure lamp (136) at a preselected time
(the time when the intensity of the lamp drifts downward[)].”
In summary, the 35 U.S.C. § 102(e) rejection of claims 1,
2 and 5 through 16 is reversed because each and every
limitation of the claimed invention is not disclosed by Tung.
Glaxo Inc. v. Novopharm Ltd., 52 F.3d 1043, 1047, 34 USPQ2d
1565, 1567 (Fed. Cir.), cert. denied, 516 U.S. 3378 (1995).
DECISION
The decision of the examiner rejecting claims 1, 2 and
5 through 16 under 35 U.S.C. § 102(e) is reversed.
REVERSED
KENNETH W. HAIRSTON )
Administrative Patent Judge )
)
)
) BOARD OF PATENT
JERRY SMITH ) APPEALS AND
Administrative Patent Judge ) INTERFERENCES
)
)
)
HOWARD B. BLANKENSHIP )
Administrative Patent Judge )
Appeal No. 2000-0423
Application No. 09/016,245
5
KWH:hh
Appeal No. 2000-0423
Application No. 09/016,245
6
HEWLETT PACKARD CO.
P.O. BOX 272400
3404 E. HARMONY ROAD
INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY ADMIN.
FT. COLLINS, CO 80527-2400