Ex Parte Kirchhoffer

Patent Trial and Appeal Board

May 31, 2018

13687012 (P.T.A.B. May. 31, 2018)

UNITED STA TES p A TENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
APPLICATION NO. FILING DATE FIRST NAMED INVENTOR
13/687,012 11/28/2012 Johann Kirchhoffer
28866 7590 06/04/2018
MACMILLAN, SOBANSKI & TODD, LLC - FORD
ONE MARITIME PLAZA - FIFTH FLOOR
720 WATER STREET
TOLEDO, OH 43604
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.
83329864 1236
EXAMINER
FLUHART, STACEY A
ART UNIT PAPER NUMBER
3655
NOTIFICATION DATE DELIVERY MODE
06/04/2018 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):
docketing@mstfirm.com
PTOL-90A (Rev. 04/07)
UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
Ex parte JOHANN KIRCHHOFFER
Appeal2017-007670
Application 13/687,012
Technology Center 3600
Before JOHN C. KERINS, EDWARD A. BROWN, and
LYNNE H. BROWNE, Administrative Patent Judges.
KERINS, Administrative Patent Judge.
DECISION ON APPEAL
STATEMENT OF THE CASE
Johann Kirchhoffer (Appellant) appeals under 35 U.S.C. § 134(a)
from the Examiner's final decision rejecting claims 1-3, 6-12, and 14--19.
We have jurisdiction under 35 U.S.C. § 6(b ).
We REVERSE.
Appeal2017-007670
Application 13/687,012
CLAIMED SUBJECT MATTER
Appellant's invention relates to a dual-clutch transmission for motor
vehicles and a cooling system having a fan impeller for cooling the dual
clutch. Spec. 1, 11. 8-11.
Claims 1 and 14 are independent. These claims are illustrative of the
claimed invention and read as follows:
1. A dual-clutch for a vehicle, comprising:
a central disk driveably connected to an input;
first and second pressure plates located on opposite sides
of the central disk;
first and second outputs;
first friction plates adjacent to the first pressure plate and
second friction plates adjacent to the second pressure plate for
producing drive connections between the input and the first and
second outputs alternately;
a housing including an inlet and an outlet, containing at
least a portion of the friction plates;
a cooling system including a fan impeller integral with the
central disk rotating with the input and producing an air stream
flowing through the housing from the inlet to the outlet.
14. A dual-clutch for a vehicle, comprising:
a central disk driveably connected to an input;
pressure plates located on opposite sides of the central
disk;
friction plates producing drive connections between the
input and first and second outputs alternately;
a housing including an inlet and an outlet;
a cooling system including a fan impeller rotating with the
input and a conduit through which air flows from the outlet to a
vehicle radiator and to the inlet.
2
Appeal2017-007670
Application 13/687,012
THE REJECTIONS
The Examiner has rejected:
(i) Claims 1-3, 6-9, 11, and 12 under 35 U.S.C. § I03(a) as being
unpatentable over Friedmann (US 2006/0289263 Al, published Dec. 28,
2006) in view ofSarar (US 2001/0025759 Al, published Oct. 4, 2001) and
Rawlings (US 4,026,400, issued May 31, 1997); and
(ii) Claims 10 and 14--19 under 35 U.S.C. § I03(a) as being
unpatentable over Friedmann in view of Sarar, Rawlings, and Antchak (US
2012/0299415 Al, published Nov. 29, 2012).
A rejection of claims 13, 21, and 22 under 35 U.S.C. § I03(a)
appearing in the Final Office Action is withdrawn on appeal. Ans. 2.
ANALYSIS
Claims 1-3, 6-9, 11, and 12--0bviousness--Friedmann, Sarar, and
Rawlings
The Examiner finds that Friedmann discloses a dual-clutch for a
vehicle comprising a central disk (intermediate pressure plate 26) driveably
connected to an input ( crankshaft 4); first and second pressure plates
(pressure plates 28, 39) located on opposite sides of the central disk; first
and second outputs (first and second transmission input shafts 35, 36); first
friction plates (friction linings 29) adjacent to the first pressure plate and
second friction plates (friction linings 40) adjacent to the second pressure
plate for producing drive connections between the input and the first and
second outputs alternately; and a housing. Final Act. 2-3 ( citing Friedmann,
Figs. 1-5). The Examiner relies on Sarar as disclosing a clutch having a
housing comprising an inlet and an outlet. Id. at 3 ( citing Sarar, Fig. 2). The
Examiner concludes that it would have been obvious to modify the dual-
3
Appeal2017-007670
Application 13/687,012
clutch of Friedmann to include, on its housing, an inlet and an outlet, as
taught by Sarar, to better cool the housing. Id. The Examiner finds that
Rawlings discloses a dual clutch comprising a fan impeller ( dish deflector
plate 37) integral with a central disk (driven plate 12). Id. (citing Rawlings,
Fig. 2). The Examiner posits that the fan impeller ( dish deflector plate 3 7)
of Rawlings would inherently produce some magnitude of an air stream
flowing through a housing. Id. The Examiner concludes that it would have
been obvious to include in the modified dual clutch of Friedmann a fan
impeller on the central disk, in order to improve lubrication and cooling. Id.
Appellant points out that element 3 7 of Rawlings is an oil deflector
plate that is provided to cause oil to flow radially outward from the area that
it is introduced into between the output shafts. Appeal Br. 8 ( citing
Rawlings, col. 4, 11. 38-53). Appellant further maintains that dish deflector
plate 3 7 is tipped at an angle, but does not vary about its circumference as
would a fan blade or an impeller, and that the Examiner has provided no
reason to believe that it would act like an impeller moving air. Reply Br. 4.
As such, Appellant contends that Rawlings does not disclose a fan impeller
that would produce an air stream through a housing. Appeal Br. 8; Reply
Br. 3--4. Appellant therefore contends that the Examiner has not established
that an ordinary artisan would be motivated to the combine the teachings of
the cited references, nor to make the modifications proposed by the
Examiner. Id.
Appellant's arguments are persuasive. The Examiner's finding that
the dish deflector plate 3 7 of Rawlings would inherently produce some
magnitude of an air stream flowing through a housing, is not supported by
the evidence, nor by sound technical explanation. Thus, the Examiner fails
4
Appeal2017-007670
Application 13/687,012
to establish that the proposed combination would result in a structure having
a fan impeller that produces an airstream through the housing of Friedmann.
As such, the articulated reason to modify Friedmann, namely to improve
lubrication and cooling within the clutch, lacks rational underpinnings.
Accordingly, the Examiner has not established a prima facie case of
obviousness directed to claim 1. The rejection of claim 1, and of claims 2, 3,
6-9, 11, and 12 depending therefrom, is not sustained.
Claims 10 and 14-19--0bviousness--Friedmann, Sarar, Rawlings, and
Antchak
Although independent claim 14 does not require, as does claim 1, a
fan impeller that is integral with a central disk of the clutch, claim 14 does
require a fan impeller that rotates with the input. The Examiner, in rejecting
claim 14, again erroneously relies on Rawlings as disclosing a fan impeller,
and therefore the reason advanced for modifying Friedmann to include
deflector plate 37 of Rawlings is lacking in rational underpinnings as in the
rejection of claim 1.
Further, for the limitation appearing in claim 14, but not in claim 1,
the Examiner relies on Antchak as disclosing a radiator (fins 208) disposed
on the outside of a clutch housing (decoupler assembly 200) and an air
stream flowing past the radiator within a conduit between the clutch housing
and a device housing 220. Id. ( citing Antchak, Figs. 7-8); see also Ans. 8-
9. The Examiner concludes that it would have been obvious to include for
the modified clutch of Friedmann: ( 1) a radiator on the outside of the clutch
housing to cool the clutch housing and dissipate heat; and (2) a device
housing to house all of the components including the clutch housing. Final
Act. 9. The Examiner posits that, with this further modification, the air
5
Appeal2017-007670
Application 13/687,012
would flow from the outlet around the clutch housing through the conduit
between the housings and to the radiator and then to the inlet. Id.
Appellant takes the position that claim 14 recites "a vehicle radiator,"
not just "a radiator," and that the Specification discloses a vehicle radiator in
relation to Figures 5-7. Id. (citing Spec. 9, 11. 10-22). Appellant maintains
that fins disposed on an outside of a clutch housing may not reasonably be
construed as a vehicle radiator. Id. As such, Appellant contends that none
of the cited references teaches a conduit that directs air from an outlet in the
clutch housing to a vehicle radiator and back to an inlet in the clutch
housing, as required by claim 14. Id. at 16.
The Examiner responds that both Friedmann and Antchak relate to
vehicles, and "regardless of whether you look at Antchak alone for this
element, or look to the overall combination of Friedmann and Antchak, a
radiator 'of a vehicle' is clearly present." Ans. 10 ( citing Friedmann ,r 1;
Antchak ,r,r 2, 62). The Examiner further asserts that the Specification does
not set forth a special definition for a "vehicle radiator." Id.
Appellant's Figures 5-7 show a front radiator 24, and Figure 7 shows
that the front radiator 24 is located in the front of region 31 of an engine.
Thus, in construing the term "vehicle radiator" to encompass any radiator,
including the fins 208 of Antchak, the Examiner exceeds the bounds of the
broadest reasonable interpretation of claim 14.
The Examiner additionally explains that the proposed modification
involves adding to Friedmann an outer housing, along the lines of device
housing 220 of Antchak, external to a housing initially provided in
Friedmann. Ans. 9-10. Such modification, even were the Examiner able to
establish the obviousness of same, would still result in a construction lacking
6
Appeal2017-007670
Application 13/687,012
a vehicle radiator and conduit extending between such radiator and an inlet
and outlet of a clutch housing, as required by claim 14.
The rejection of claim 14, and of claims 15-19 depending therefrom,
is therefore not sustained.
Claim 10 depends from claim 1 and recites "a conduit system
extending outside of the housing, through which the air stream flows from
the outlet to a radiator of the vehicle and back to the inlet." Appeal Br. 22
(Claims App.). Accordingly, the rejection of claim 10 is not sustained for
the reasons noted above with respect to both claims 1 and 14.
DECISION
The rejections of claims 1-3, 6-12, and 14--19 are reversed.
REVERSED
7