10567882 (P.T.A.B. Apr. 16, 2014)

Ex Parte Hoffmann et al

Patent Trial and Appeal BoardApr 16, 2014

10567882 (P.T.A.B. Apr. 16, 2014)

UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE ____________ BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD ____________ Ex parte MATTHIAS HOFFMANN, ANDREA BAUERSACHS, and ANDREAS PRAUSE ____________ Appeal 2011-013422 Application 10/567,882 Technology Center 3600 ____________ Before MURRIEL E. CRAWFORD, GAY ANN SPAHN, and MICHAEL C. ASTORINO, Administrative Patent Judges. ASTORINO, Administrative Patent Judge. DECISION ON APPEAL STATEMENT OF THE CASE The Appellants appeal under 35 U.S.C. § 134 from the Examiner’s decision rejecting claims 1-5, 7-12, 14-27, 29-32, 34-37, and 82-87. App. Br. 1. Claims 6, 13, 28, and 33 have been cancelled and claims 38-81 have been withdrawn. Id. We have jurisdiction over the appeal under 35 U.S.C. § 6(b). We REVERSE. Appeal 2011-013422 Application 10/567,882 2 Claimed Subject Matter Claim 1, the sole independent claim, is representative of the subject matter on appeal and is reproduced below. 1. An adjustable mechanism for a motor vehicle for adjusting anyone of an adjustable part in a motor vehicle and a seat part comprising: a spindle nut defining an axis and interacting with a threaded spindle and comprising in an external surface an external toothing through which the spindle nut engages with a further gearing element; wherein the external toothing of the spindle nut is formed through radially inwardly pointing indentations in the external surface of the spindle nut such that a crest of each tooth is defined by a portion of the external surface of the spindle nut, and wherein tooth depth diminishes towards at least one axial end of the spindle nut; wherein the spindle nut has an opening with an internal surface, said internal surface comprising an internal toothing through which the spindle nut interacts with the threaded spindle; wherein the spindle nut has in the axial direction on at least one side of the external toothing an end section without external toothing, and wherein an outer diameter of the crest is less than or equal to an outer diameter of the end section; wherein the internal toothing of the spindle nut interacting with the threaded spindle extends over a greater length in the axial direction than the external toothing of the spindle nut so that the internal toothing extends axially into the at least one end section without external toothing; and wherein the external toothing comprises, in the axial direction, two axial edge regions and a center region having different toothing shapes, wherein the external toothing is globoid in shape in said axial edge regions with a tooth depth continuously reducing towards the axial ends of the external toothing, and wherein the center region has a cylindrical portion with an involute profile in the axial direction. Appeal 2011-013422 Application 10/567,882 3 Rejections The Appellants request our review of the following Examiner’s rejections. Claims 1-5, 7-12, 15-27, 29-32, 34, 36, 37, and 82-871 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as unpatentable over Taubmann ʼ456 (WO 99/51456 A1, pub. Oct. 14, 1999)2, Hendrick (US 2,128,483, iss. Aug. 30, 1938), and Campbell (US 3,812,737, iss. May 28, 1974). Claim 14 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as unpatentable over Taubmann ʼ456, Hendrick, Campbell, and Hauser (US 4,386,893, iss. Jun. 7, 1983). Claim 35 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as unpatentable over Taubmann ʼ456, Hendrick, Campbell, and Muellich (US 5,893,959, iss. Apr. 13, 1999).3 OPINION Claim 1 recites “[a]n adjustable mechanism” having “external toothing [which] comprises, in the axial direction, two axial edge regions and a center region having different toothing shapes.” App. Br., Clms. App’x. (emphasis added). 1 Although claims 1-5, 7, 8, 12, 15-27, 29-32, 34, 36, 37, and 82-87 are listed in the ground of rejection at page 4 of the Answer, in the Final Office Action, mailed September 22, 2010, at page 6, the Examiner also includes claims 9-11 in the rejection. 2 Taubmann ’986 (US 7,051,986 B1, iss. May 30, 2006) is used as a translation of the PCT reference for discussing the rejection. 3 Although the Answer does not list the rejection of claim 35 in the “(9) Grounds of Rejection” section, it appears that the Examiner intended to maintain this rejection because the Muellich reference used to reject claim 35 is listed in the “(8) Evidence Relied Upon” section. Appeal 2011-013422 Application 10/567,882 4 The Examiner finds that Taubmann ʼ456 fails to explicitly disclose, but that Hendrick does disclose, “two axial edge regions and a center region having different toothing shapes,” as recited in claim 1. Ans. 5-6. More specifically, the Examiner finds that Hendrick teaches external toothing comprising “in the axial direction, two axial edge regions and a center region having different toothing shapes (see fig.5), wherein the external toothing is globoid in shape (the axial edge regions of this toothing is [sic, are] globoid in shape).” Id. The Appellants contend that the references cited by the Examiner are silent with respect this feature of the claim. App. Br. 8. In particular, the Appellants assert that Hendrick does not disclose the “different toothing shapes,” required by claim 1. App. Br. 9, Reply Br. 3. According to the Appellants, Hendrick only discloses a globoid shape. Id. The Appellants’ contention is persuasive. In response to the Appellants’ contention, the Examiner further explains: “Hendrick discloses both a globoid axial edge region tooth shape and a cylindrical portion in a center region.” Ans. 10. The Examiner’s explanation identifies a single toothing shape in Hendrick, i.e., the globoid shape of the axial edge regions. Ans. 6, 10. The Examiner’s explanation that Hendrick also discloses a “cylindrical portion” does not identify a shape different from the identified globoid shape. Therefore, the Examiner’s finding that Hendrick discloses different toothing shapes is inadequately supported. Additionally, the Examiner does not rely on Campbell to disclose “two axial edge regions and a center region having different toothing shapes,” as recited in claim 1. The Examiner finds that Campbell discloses Appeal 2011-013422 Application 10/567,882 5 “a particular tooth profile in fig.[]4 for a worm wheel which has a center region [of the toothing] which has a cylindrical portion with an involute profile in the axial direction (46, 48 is cylindrical portion and depressed relative to the first tooth crowns).” Ans. 7; see also Campbell, col. 3, l. 56- col. 4, l. 2. The Examiner then concludes that it would have been obvious to one having skill in the art to further modify the spindle nut of Taubmann ʼ456, as modified in view of Hendrick, to include the specific toothing profile of Campbell.4 Ans. 7. However, the Examiner does not explain why this further modification would have resulted in “two axial edge regions and a center region having different toothing shapes,” as recited in claim 1. Thus, the Examiner’s rejection of independent claim 1, and claims 2- 5, 7-12, 15-27, 29-32, 34, 36, 37, and 82-87 which depend therefrom, as unpatentable over Taubmann ʼ456, Hendrick, and Campbell is not sustained. The remaining rejections based on Taubmann ʼ456, Hendrick, and Campbell in combination with Hauser or Muellich rely on the same inadequately supported finding that Hendrick discloses different toothing shapes. The Examiner’s additional findings from Hauser (Ans. 8) and Muellich (Final Office Action 12-13, mailed Sep. 22, 2010) do not remedy the deficiency of the Examiner’s rejection of claim 1. As such, we cannot sustain the rejections, under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a), of: claim 14 as unpatentable over Taubmann ʼ456, Hendrick, Campbell, and Hauser; and claim 35 as unpatentable over Taubmann ʼ456, Hendrick, Campbell, and Muellich. 4 The Examiner’s Answer has a typographical error in that it inadvertently lists a “Landskron” reference; however, it is clear from the context of the paragraph that the Examiner meant Campbell. Appeal 2011-013422 Application 10/567,882 6 DECISION We REVERSE the rejections of claims 1-5, 7-12, 14-27, 29-32, 34- 37, and 82-87. REVERSED Klh