Ex Parte Mraz et al

Patent Trial and Appeal Board

Jan 28, 2016

12760162 (P.T.A.B. Jan. 28, 2016)

UNITED STA TES p A TENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
APPLICATION NO. FILING DATE
121760,162 04/14/2010
1912 7590 02/01/2016
AMSTER, ROTHSTEIN & EBENSTEIN LLP
90 PARK A VENUE
NEW YORK, NY 10016
FIRST NAMED INVENTOR
Ronald Mraz
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.
65587/66 8501
EXAMINER
POTRATZ, DANIEL B
ART UNIT PAPER NUMBER
2491
NOTIFICATION DATE DELIVERY MODE
02/01/2016 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):
PTODOCKET@ARELA W.COM
PTOL-90A (Rev. 04/07)
UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
Ex parte RONALD MRAZ and STEVEN STAUBL Y
Appeal2014-002364
Application 12/760,162
Technology Center 2400
Before JOHN A. EVANS, CATHERINE SHIANG, and
MELISSA A. RAAP ALA, Administrative Patent Judges.
SHIANG, Administrative Patent Judge.
DECISION ON APPEAL
Appellants appeal under 35 U.S.C. § 134(a) from the Examiner's final
rejection of claims 1-5, 9-24, and 49. We have jurisdiction under 35 U.S.C.
§ 6(b). We reverse.
STATEMENT OF THE CASE
The present invention relates to the security of data networks. See
generally Spec. 1. Claim 1 is exemplary:
1. A ruggedized network interface appliance for ensuring
secure data transfer comprising:
Appeal2014-002364
Application 12/760,162
send-only network interface circuitry comprising a
processor, a program memory, a first host interface, and a first
serial interface;
receive-only network interface circuitry comprising a
processor, a program memory, a second host interface, and a
second serial interface;
a single data link connecting the first serial interface of
the send-only network interface circuitry to the second serial
interface of the receive-only network interface circuitry;
wherein the send-only network interface circuitry is
configured not to receive any data from said data link, and said
receive-only network interface circuitry is configured not to
send any data to said data link; and
wherein the send-only network circuitry and the receive-
only network circuitry reside on a single circuit board,
wherein the single circuit board has three separate
contiguous areas, a first area containing the send-only network
circuitry, a second area containing the receive-only network
circuitry and a third area disposed directly between the first area
and the second area containing no electrical connections
between the first area and the second area, and
wherein the single data link comprises only a single
optical isolator device which spans the third area but has no
connection thereto.
Harvey
Bunn
Ruhnau
Goldring
References and Rejections
US 2005/0033990 Al
US 2007/0204145 Al
US 7,795,633 B2
WO 2009/047556 Al
Feb. 10,2005
Aug.30,2007
Sept. 14, 2010
Apr. 16, 2009
Stuart Ball, Analog Interfacing to Embedded Microprocessors: Real
World Design (2001) ("Ball").
2
Appeal2014-002364
Application 12/760,162
Douglas W. Jones, RS-232 Data Diode Tutorial and Reference
Manual (July 28, 2006) ("Jones").
Claims 1-5, 9, and 20-24 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as
being unpatentable over Harvey, Goldring, and Ball.
Claims 10 and 11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as being
unpatentable over Harvey, Goldring, Ball, and Jones.
Claims 12-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as being
unpatentable over Harvey, Goldring, Ball, and Bunn.
Claims 49 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as being unpatentable
over Harvey, Goldring, Ball, and Ruhnau.
ANALYSIS
We have reviewed Appellants' arguments in the Briefs, the
Examiner's rejection, and the Examiner's response to Appellants'
arguments. We concur with Appellants' conclusion that the Examiner erred
in finding Harvey and Goldring collectively teach "wherein the send-only
network circuitry and the receive-only network circuitry reside on a single
circuit board," as recited in independent claim 1 (emphasis added). 1
The Examiner cites Goldring's Figure 1 for that claim limitation.
Final Act. 4; Ans. 3---6. The Examiner initially maps the claimed "single
circuit board" to Goldring's data diode 10. See Final Act. 4.
In response to Appellants' arguments, the Examiner maps the claimed
"single circuit board" to Goldring's diode housing 23. See Ans. 6. The
1 Appellants raise additional arguments. Because the identified issue is
dispositive of the appeal, we do not reach the additional arguments.
3
Appeal2014-002364
Application 12/760,162
Examiner finds "Goldring's schematic of a data diode shown in Figure 1
fully details the physical location of each component contained within the
data diode." Ans. 4 (emphases added). Therefore, the Examiner finds
Goldring's Figure 1 shows the "send-only circuitry (element 16) and the
receive-only circuitry (element 18) ... residing on a single housing element,
the housing element meets the claim limitation of a 'circuit board."' Ans. 6.
Goldring states: "Figure 1 is a schematic representation of a USB to
USB data diode according to a first embodiment of the invention, shown
connected between two external USB ports[.]" Goldring 3 (emphasis
added).
We agree with Appellants that contrary to the Examiner's finding, one
skilled in the art would not consider Goldring's "diode housing 23" or "data
diode 10" (Goldring 3) as a "single circuit board." See Reply Br. 4--5; App.
Br. 5-7.
Further, the Examiner's finding that Goldring's "schematic of a data
diode shown in Figure 1 fully details the physical location of each
component" (emphases added) is unsupported by the record and contradicts
the knowledge of one skilled in the art. We agree with Appellants that one
skilled in the art would understand Goldring' s "schematic representation"
does not show whether "send-only circuitry (element 16) and the receive-
only circuitry (element 18)" reside on a single circuit board, as such
schematic representation does not show the physical locations of Goldring' s
send-only circuitry (element 16) and the receive-only circuitry (element 18).
See App. Br. 4--5.
4
Appeal2014-002364
Application 12/760,162
Because the Examiner fails to provide sufficient evidence to support
the rejection, we are constrained by the record to reverse the Examiner's
rejection of claim 1, and claims 2-5, 9-24, and 49 for similar reasons.
DECISION
The Examiner's decision rejecting claims 1-5, 9-24, and 49 is
reversed.
REVERSED
msc
5