Ex Parte McSweeney

Patent Trial and Appeal Board

Aug 22, 2016

12247001 (P.T.A.B. Aug. 22, 2016)

UNITED STA TES p A TENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
APPLICATION NO. FILING DATE
12/247,001 10/07/2008
27572 7590 08/24/2016
HARNESS, DICKEY & PIERCE, PLC
P.O. BOX 828
BLOOMFIELD HILLS, MI 48303
FIRST NAMED INVENTOR
Daniel L. McSweeney
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.
0315-000686 7201
EXAMINER
BRADFORD, JONATHAN
ART UNIT PAPER NUMBER
3744
NOTIFICATION DATE DELIVERY MODE
08/24/2016 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):
troymailroom@hdp.com
PTOL-90A (Rev. 04/07)
UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
Ex parte DANIEL L. MCSWEENEY
Appeal2014-004370 1
Application 12/247,001 2
Technology Center 3700
Before MICHAEL C. ASTORINO, MICHELLE R. OSINSKI, and
MATTHEWS. MEYERS, Administrative Patent Judges.
MEYERS, Administrative Patent Judge.
DECISION ON APPEAL
STATEMENT OF THE CASE
Appellant appeals under 35 U.S.C. § 134(a) from the Examiner's final
rejection of claims 1-9. We have jurisdiction under 35 U.S.C. § 6(b). An
oral hearing was held on August 16, 2016.
We REVERSE.
1 Our decision references Appellant's Appeal Brief ("Appeal Br.," filed
February 1, 2012) and Reply Brief ("Reply Br.," filed May 29, 2012), and
the Examiner's Answer ("Ans.," mailed March 26, 2012) and Final Office
Action ("Final Act.," mailed September 1, 2011).
2 Appellant identifies Emerson Climate Technologies, Inc., as the real party
in interest (Appeal Br. 3).
Appeal2014-004370
Application 12/247,001
CLAIMED fNVENTION
Appellant's invention relates "to a system and method for calibrating
parameters of a refrigeration system with a variable speed compressor"
(Spec. i-f 2). Claim 1, reproduced below with added bracketed notations, is
illustrative of the subject matter on appeal:
1. A system comprising:
[a] a compressor connected to a condenser and an
evaporator;
[b] a condenser sensor that outputs a condenser signal
corresponding to at least one of a sensed condenser pressure and
a sensed condenser temperature;
[ c] an inverter drive that modulates a frequency of electric
power delivered to said compressor to modulate a speed of said
compressor;
[ d] a control module connected to said inverter drive that
determines a measured condenser temperature based on said
condenser signal, that monitors electric power data and
compressor speed data from said inverter drive, that calculates a
derived condenser temperature based on said monitored electric
po\~1er data, said monitored compressor speed data, and
compressor map data for said compressor, said compressor map
data functionally correlating electric power data and compressor
speed data with condenser temperature data for said compressor,
and that compares said measured condenser temperature with
said derived condenser temperature, and selectively updates said
compressor map data based on said comparison.
(Appeal Br. 25 (Claims. App.)).
REJECTION
Claims 1-9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as unpatentable over
Pham (US 2005/0235660 Al, pub. Oct. 27, 2005), Venkataramani (US
2007/0089424 Al, pub. Apr. 26, 2007), Itoh (US 6,035,653, iss. Mar. 14,
2
Appeal2014-004370
Application 12/247,001
2000), Wang (US 2003/0146290 Al, pub. Aug. 7, 2003), and Doll (US
2006/0042276 Al, pub. Mar. 2, 2006).
ANALYSIS
Independent claim 1 and dependent claims 2 and 3
We are persuaded by Appellant's argument that the Examiner erred in
rejecting independent claim 1 under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) because the
combination of Pham, Venkataramani, Itoh, Wang, and Doll fails to disclose
or suggest "compar[ ing] said measured condenser temperature with said
derived condenser temperature, and selectively updat[ing] said compressor
map data based on said comparison," as recited in limitation [ d] of
independent claim 1 (see Appeal Br. 15-17; see also Reply Br. 5---6).
In rejecting claim 1 under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a), the Examiner cites
paragraph 77 of Pham as disclosing a "compressor map," but acknowledges
that "[t]he compressor map [in Pham] is only a baseline reading that is
determined during the operation of the compressor when it is initially
installed" (Final Act. 4 (citing Pham i-f 77)). To address that the "compressor
map" is "selectively update[ d]" based on a comparison of "said measured
condenser temperature with said derived condenser temperature," the
Examiner additionally relies on Venkataramani and Doll (see Ans. 7). More
particularly, the Examiner relies on Venkataramani to show that "it is known
to compare measured values with calculated values to determine if there is a
sensor malfunction" (Final Act. 2 (citing Venkataramani i-f 6)) and Doll to
disclose "updat[ing] the compressor map data based on the comparison,
because it would result in a more accurate model of the system operation"
(Final Act. 4--5 (citing Doll i-fi-12, 24)).
3
Appeal2014-004370
Application 12/247,001
However, we agree with Appellant that the cited portions of Pham, in
combination with Venkataramani and Doll, fail to disclose or suggest
"compar[ing] said measured condenser temperature with said derived
condenser temperature, and selectively updat[ing] said compressor map data
based on said comparison," as recited in limitation [d] of independent claim
1 (see Appeal Br. 15-1 7; see also Reply Br. 5-6).
In making this determination, we note that Pham is directed to a
"diagnostic system for use with a compressor" (Pham i-f 2). Pham discloses
that its system "includes a compressor protection and control system 12 for
determining an operating mode for the compressor 10 based on sensed
compressor parameters" for "toggl[ing] the compressor between operating
modes including a normal mode, a reduced-capacity mode, and a shutdown
mode" (id. i-f 46). Pham further discloses that "the capacity of the
compressor 10 may be modulated in accordance with demand or in response
to a fault condition" (id. i-f 53) by its "processing circuitry 70 work[ing] in
conjunction with sensors 66, 68 to direct the power interruption system 72 to
toggle the compressor between a normal operating mode, a reduced-capacity
mode, and a shutdown mode" (id. i-f 82). Pham discloses "[s]ensor 66
monitors compressor current and voltage to determine, and differentiate
between, mechanical failures, motor failures, and electrical component
failures" (id. i-f 55), but also discloses that its system may "include a
discharge pressure sensor 13 mounted in a discharge pressure zone or a
temperature sensor 15 mounted in an external system such as a condenser"
(id. i-f 56). We also note that Pham's "system controller can confirm a fan
failure finding of the processing circuitry 70 based on fan speed data
available to the controller" (id. i-f 93). Pham further discloses that the data
4
Appeal2014-004370
Application 12/247,001
from these sensors are "sent to the processing circuitry 70 to compare the
operating parameters to base-line parameters" (id. i-f 76). More particularly,
Pham discloses that its "base-line parameters are determined at installation
of the compressor 10 to determine 'normal' or no-fault operating conditions
for the compressor 10 and system 11" (id. i-f 76). Pham also discloses that its
"system 12 can alternatively determine the evaporator temperature and
condenser temperature based solely on the discharge line temperature and
current information received from sensors 66, 68" (id. i-f 110).
Venkataramani is directed to "methods and apparatus for controlling
hot streaks in the combustors" (Venkataramani i-f 1 ). Venkataramani
discloses
[a] condition monitoring & fault accommodation program stored
in the electronic controller may be used for determining if the
temperature sensors are broken or malfunctioning by calculating
or simulating a combustor temperature and comparing it to
measured temperatures from the temperature sensors and by
comparing the measured fi1el pressures in the individual fi1el
nozzle circuits with the simulated or calculated fuel pressures.
(Id. i-f 6). More particularly, Venkataramani discloses that its controller
"compares the simulated combustor temperatures from the model to
measured temperatures from the temperature sensors 55 and the simulated
fuel pressures in the fuel nozzles with the measured fuel pressures in the
individual fuel nozzle circuits 31." (id. i-f 17).
Doll is directed to a system "for detecting performance degradation in
a refrigeration system" (Doll i-f 1 ). Doll discloses that its system
includes a plurality of sensors for sensing system parameters and
transmitting data signals to a control, the control having a
microprocessor and computer-readable instructions for storing a
reference map of data relating to system parameters, for
receiving and processing data signals from the sensors, for
5
Appeal2014-004370
Application 12/247,001
comparing the processed data signals to the data of the reference
map, for detecting a system defect based upon the compared data.
(Id. i-f 4). Doll further discloses "comparing the gathered data from the
sensors to the reference data; and generating a condenser fault alert if the
gathered data does not fall within a predetermined range of the
corresponding reference data" (id. i-f 7). Doll also discloses that its system
"establish[ es] and stor[ es] at least one operating map, such as in non-volatile
memory 144, and preferably a family of operating maps, that can be used as
a reference to determine whether the system 100 experiences any
performance degradation over time" (id. i-f 23). More particularly, Doll
discloses that its
operating map includes stored data that can only be overwritten
in limited circumstances. In a preferred embodiment, the stored
data is contained in non-volatile memory 144 so as to prevent
unintended or unauthorized deletion or overwriting of the data.
In one embodiment, the stored data is preprogrammed and is
derived from system design and testing under known conditions,
such as in a controlled factory environment prior to installation.
In another embodiment, the stored data is derived from actual
system operation conducted during an initialization stage,
preferably conducted immediately following installation of the
system 100 in the field and operation of the system at specific
operating conditions. Preferably, the initialization stage, and any
subsequent data gathering, are preceded by at least a minimum
operating period or interval so as to achieve stabilized system
conditions. Initialization can also be performed upon restarting
of the system after conducting significant repairs. In either
embodiment, the system 100 allows for periodic re-populating of
the stored data to correlate with actual system performance in the
installed environment. For example, the control 140 of the
system 100 may include password access or other security
features that allow authorized personnel to run an initialization
algorithm upon system installation, after system repairs, or
following shutdown.
6
Appeal2014-004370
Application 12/247,001
(Id. il 24).
In response to Appellant's arguments (see Appeal Br. 15-17), the
Examiner states
Venkataramani and Doll are provided to show that it would also
be obvious to compare the derived temperature with a measured
temperature from a sensor (Venkataramani, paragraph 6, lines
5-10) and to selectively update the map based on the comparison
(Doll, paragraphs 2 and 24 ). Therefore it is maintained that each
and every limitation of independent claim 1 is met by the cited
references when viewed in combination.
(Ans. 7). The difficulty with the Examiner response, as Appellant points
out, is that "Doll describes an operating map that includes stored data that
can only be overwritten in limited circumstances" (Reply Br. 5---6 (citing
Doll i-f 24)). More particularly, Doll discloses that its "system 100 allows for
periodic re-populating of the stored data to correlate with actual system
performance in the installed environment ... [by] allow[ing] authorized
personnel to run an initialization algorithm upon system installation, after
system repairs, or following shutdown" (Doll i-f 24). In this regard, Doll
does not selectively update its data based on a comparison; but rather "re-
populates" or overwrites its "stored data to correlate with actual system
performance in the installed environment" after "system installation, after
system repairs, or following shutdown" (id. (emphasis added)). We fail to
understand, and the Examiner does not adequately explain how Doll's
disclosure regarding its "initialization algorithm" in combination with
Venkataramani' s teaching regarding a comparison between simulated and
measured sensor data (see Venkataramani i-f 6) renders obvious "compar[ing]
said measured condenser temperature with said derived condenser
temperature, and selectively updat[ing] said compressor map data based on
7
Appeal2014-004370
Application 12/247,001
said comparison," as recited in limitation [ d] of independent claim 1 (see
Ans. 7). We note the Examiner does not rely on Itoh and Wang to cure this
deficiency.
Independent claims 4 and 7, and dependent claims 5, 6, 8, and 9
Independent claims 4 and 7 include a limitation substantially similar
to independent claim 1 's limitation discussed above. Therefore, we do not
sustain the Examiner's rejection under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) of independent
claims 4 and 7, and claims 5, 6, 8, and 9 that depend therefrom, for the same
reasons set forth above with respect to independent claim 1.
DECISION
The Examiner's rejection of claims 1-9 under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) is
reversed.
REVERSED
8