Ex Parte Murkowski et al

Patent Trial and Appeal Board

Feb 25, 2013

10597536 (P.T.A.B. Feb. 25, 2013)

UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
__________

BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
__________

Ex parte JOHN MURKOWSKI,
ROBERT MESAROS, and LARRY AZZANO
__________

Appeal 2011-012415
Application 10/597,536
Technology Center 3700
__________

Before JEFFREY N. FREDMAN, ERICA A. FRANKLIN, and
ULRIKE W. JENKS, Administrative Patent Judges.

FRANKLIN, Administrative Patent Judge.

DECISION ON APPEAL
This is an appeal under 35 U.S.C. § 134(a) involving claims to an
ultrasonic diagnostic imaging system. The Patent Examiner rejected the
claims as obvious. We have jurisdiction under 35 U.S.C. § 6(b). We affirm.
Claims 1, 3-4, and 6-14 are on appeal. Claims 1, 11, and 12 are
representative and are reproduced in the “Claims Appendix” of Appellants‟
Brief (App. Br. 12-14).
Appeal 2011-012415
Application 10/597,536

2
The Examiner rejected claims 1, 3-4, and 6-14 under 35 U.S.C. §
103(a) as unpatentable over Burris,
1
Wilkins
2
and Allen.
3

Upon consideration of the evidence on this record and each of
Appellants‟ contentions, we find that the preponderance of evidence on this
record supports the Examiner‟s conclusions that (a) the subject matter of
Appellants‟ claims 1, 3-4, and 6-14 are unpatentable over the combination of
Burris, Wilkins and Allen. Accordingly, we sustain the Examiner‟s
rejections of each of these claims for the reasons set forth in the Answer
(Ans. 4-10) which we incorporate herein by reference.
For emphasis only, we provide the following: Although not in the
same field of endeavor as the claimed invention or Burris, Allen is still
analogous, as it is reasonably pertinent to the particular problem with which
the inventor is involved, i.e., providing an inter-arm locking mechanism to
lock the two arms together in a stowed position. See In re Clay, 966 F.2d
656, 658-659 (Fed. Cir. 1992). A person of ordinary skill in the art seeking
to provide an inter-arm locking mechanism to an articulating arm assembly
of an ultrasonic diagnostic imaging system would naturally look to
references employing locking mechanisms for articulating arm assemblies,
including such assemblies for a microwave dish antenna. See In re Paulsen,
30 F.3d 1475, 1481 (Fed. Cir. 1994) and In re ICON Health and Fitness,
Inc., 496 F.3d 1374, 1380 (Fed. Cir. 2007)( “[A]n inventor considering a
hinge and latch mechanism for portable computers would naturally look to

1
US Patent No. 5,924,988 issued to David E. Burris et al., Jul. 20, 1999.
2
Patent No. US 6, 663,569 B1 issued to Jay Wilkins et al., Dec. 16, 2003.
3
US Patent No. 5,363,116 issued to Carrol M. Allen, Nov. 8, 1994.
Appeal 2011-012415
Application 10/597,536

3
references employing other „housings, hinges, latches, springs, etc.,‟”
regardless of the area from which the element arose.).

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

AFFIRMED

cdc