Ex Parte Hasz et al

Board of Patent Appeals and Interferences

Apr 1, 2010

11054635 (B.P.A.I. Apr. 1, 2010)

UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
____________

BEFORE THE BOARD OF PATENT APPEALS
AND INTERFERENCES
____________

Ex parte WAYNE CHARLES HASZ, NESIM ABUAF,
ROBERT ALAN JOHNSON, and CHING-PANG LEE
____________

Appeal 2009-005365
Application 11/054,635
Technology Center 1700
____________

Decided: April 01, 2010
____________

Before BRADLEY R. GARRIS, CHUNG K. PAK, and
TERRY J. OWENS, Administrative Patent Judges.

GARRIS, Administrative Patent Judge.

DECISION ON APPEAL
Appellants appeal under 35 U.S.C. § 134 from the Examiner's
decision rejecting claims 43-62. We have jurisdiction under 35 U.S.C.
§ 6(b).
We AFFIRM for the reasons expressed in the Answer and below.

Appeal 2009-005365
Application 11/054,635

Appellants claim an article comprising a passage hole 36 having an
inner surface, the article further comprising a turbulation material applied to
a substrate 32 that is capable of being inserted into the passage hole such
that the substrate is adjacent the inner surface of the passage hole (claim 43;
Figs. 3-7). Appellants also claim an embodiment wherein the turbulation
material forms protuberances on the inner surface of the passage hole in a
selected pattern comprising at least two rings (claim 52/44/43; Fig. 5).
Representative claims 43, 44 and 52 read as follows:

43. An article comprising a passage hole having an inner surface,
said article further comprising a turbulation material applied to a substrate
that is capable of being inserted into the passage hole such that the substrate
is adjacent the inner surface of the passage hole, wherein the turbulation
material is bonded to the inner surface of the passage hole by a bonding
agent.

44. The article of claim 43, wherein the turbulation material
extends beyond the inner surface of the passage hole, forming a plurality of
protuberances.

52. The article of claim 44 wherein the protuberances are disposed
in a selected pattern comprising at least two rings.

The reference set forth below is relied upon by the Examiner as
evidence of anticipation:

Hasz EP 1050663 A2 Nov. 08, 2000

The Examiner rejects all appealed claims under 35 U.S.C. § 102 (b) as
being anticipated by Hasz.
Appellants separately argue sole independent claim 43 as well as the
group of dependent claims 52, 59, and 61. We select claim 52 to represent
2
Appeal 2009-005365
Application 11/054,635

this dependent claim group. Therefore, our discussion below will focus on
claims 43 and 52.
Appellants present the following argument regarding claim 43:

Contrary to the Office action that all of the elements of
Claims 43 are disclosed in Hasz, at least the feature of an
article comprising a passage hole having an inner surface,
and further comprising a turbulation material applied to a
substrate that is capable of being inserted into the passage
hole such that the substrate is adjacent the inner surface of
the passage hole, is not disclosed, taught or suggested in
Hasz. Rather, Hasz teaches a braze foil or tape that is
applied to the internal cavity of the component. In view of
the foregoing, the rejection is unsupported by the art and
should be withdrawn.

This argument is unpersuasive.
As correctly explained by the Examiner (Ans. 5-6), the passage hole
and substrate of claim 43 are respectively indistinguishable from the internal
cavity and braze tape of Hasz. Appellants’ recitation of these claim 43
features fails to reveal any difference between the claim and the Hasz
reference. Moreover, Appellants fail to provide any explanation as to why
these claim features are thought to distinguish from the reference.
Appellants further argue that Hasz does not disclose a selected pattern
comprising at least two rings as required by representative claim 52 (Br. 12).
According to Appellants, the particles formed in Hasz are randomly
arranged on the internal cavity at the component (id.).
We agree with the Examiner (Ans. para. bridging 6-7), however, that
Figures 2 and 3 of Hasz show an arrangement of protuberances 12 which
would form a pattern of rings on the internal cavity. Significantly, this
finding by the Examiner regarding Figures 2 and 3 specifically has not been
3
Appeal 2009-005365
Application 11/054,635

contested by Appellants in the record of this appeal. Under these
circumstances, Appellants' argument regarding representative claim 52 also
is unpersuasive.
For the reasons set forth above and in the Answer, Appellants have
failed to reveal harmful error in the Examiner’s rejection of the appealed
claims. We sustain, therefore, the § 102 rejection of claims 43-62 as being
anticipated by Hasz.
The decision of the Examiner is affirmed.

No time period for taking any subsequent action in connection with
this appeal may be extended under 37 C.F.R. § 1.136(a) (2008).
AFFIRMED

ssl

GENERAL ELECTRIC COMPANY
GLOBAL RESEARCH
ONE RESEARCH CIRCLE
PATENT DOCKET RM. BLDG. K1-4A59
NISKAYUNA, NY 12309
4