Ex Parte RogozinskiDownload PDFPatent Trial and Appeal BoardMay 30, 201814422006 (P.T.A.B. May. 30, 2018) Copy Citation UNITED STA TES p A TENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE APPLICATION NO. FILING DATE 14/422,006 02/17/2015 44696 7590 Dr. Mark M. Friedman Moshe Aviv Tower, 54th floor 7 Jabotinsky St. Ramat Gan, 5252007 ISRAEL 06/01/2018 FIRST NAMED INVENTOR Joseph Rogozinski 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. 5466/2 2863 EXAMINER MENDIRATTA, VISHU K ART UNIT PAPER NUMBER 3711 NOTIFICATION DATE DELIVERY MODE 06/01/2018 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): patents@friedpat.com friedpat.uspto@gmail.com rivka_f@friedpat.com PTOL-90A (Rev. 04/07) UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD Ex parte JOSEPH ROGOZINSKI Appeal2018-003622 Application 14/422,006 Technology Center 3700 Before LINDA E. HORNER, ERIC C. JESCHKE, and PAUL J. KORNICZKY, Administrative Patent Judges. KORNICZKY, Administrative Patent Judge. DECISION ON APPEAL Appeal 2018-003 622 Application 14/422,006 STATEMENT OF THE CASE Pursuant to 35 U.S.C. § 134(a), Appellant 1 appeals from the Examiner's decision, as set forth in the Final Office Action dated December 20, 2016 ("Final Act.") and the Advisory Action dated March 1, 2017 ("Adv. Act."), rejecting claims 1, 2, 4--12, and 18-25.2 We have jurisdiction under 35 U.S.C. § 6(b ). We REVERSE. THE CLAIMED SUBJECT MATTER The claims are directed to a book with inflatable objects. Claim 1, the only independent claim on appeal, is reproduced below with disputed limitations italicized for emphasis: 1. A book, comprising: (a) an inflation valve; (b) an evacuation valve; ( c) at least two pages operationally coupled together in a binding, which defines an axis about which said at least two pages rotate when turned; ( d) at least two inflatable objects, each of said at least two pages having at least one of said at least two inflatable objects mounted thereon, said inflation valve operationally coupled to one of said inflatable objects and said evacuation valve operationally coupled to one of said inflatable objects; ( e) at least one fluid conduit, interposed between a first and a second of said at least two inflatable objects, said fluid conduit configured to allow a fluid to flow between said at least two inflatable objects. Joseph Rogozinski ("Appellant") is the applicant under 37 C.F.R. § 1.46, and is identified as the real party in interest. Appeal Brief, dated May 22, 2017 ("Br."), at 3. 2 Claims 3and13-17 are cancelled. Br. 21-23 (Claims App.). 2 Appeal 2018-003 622 Application 14/422,006 REFERENCES In rejecting the claims on appeal, the Examiner relied upon the following prior art: Watrous Stevenson us 3,289,333 us 4,208,123 REJECTIONS Dec. 6, 1966 June 17, 1980 The Examiner made the following rejections: 1. Claims 1, 2, 4--12, and 18-25 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 102(b) as being anticipated by Stevenson. 2. Claims 1, 2, 4--12, and 18-25 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 102(b) as being anticipated by Watrous. 3. Claim 9 stands rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as being unpatentable over Watrous and Stevenson. Appellant seeks our review of these rejections. DISCUSSION Rejection 1: Claims 1, 2, 4-12, and 18-25 as Anticipated by Stevenson The Examiner finds that Stevenson discloses all of the limitations of claim 1, including "at least two pages having at least one of said at least two inflatable objects mounted thereon." Final Act. 2; see also Adv. Act. 2; Answer dated October 18, 2017 ("Ans."), at 5---6. The Examiner construes "mounted" to mean "to place in position." Adv. Act. 2 (citing dictionary.com); Ans. 5-6. Using this construction, the Examiner finds that Stevenson discloses two inflatable objects 1, 2 and at least two pages have at 3 Appeal 2018-003 622 Application 14/422,006 least one of said at least two inflatable objects mounted thereon. Final Act. 2; Adv. Act. 2; Ans. 5---6. Appellant asserts that Examiner's rejection is erroneous because the "plain meaning of the term 'mounted"' is "fixedly connected." Br. 14. Appellant also asserts that the Specification defines mounted as fixedly connected "in at least 30 places." Id. Appellant, however, does not identify support for this definition from a dictionary or the Specification. Neither the Examiner's nor Appellant's proposed definitions are persuasive. Although the Specification does not explicitly define the term mounted, it does describe how the inflatable objects are attached to a page. The Specification, for example, broadly states that: inflatable objects are "connected" to a page (Spec. 2:5---6); "first object 56 is connected to a first page 52" (Spec. 5:22); and "[s]econd page 5020 includes an inflatable object 5022 mounted on a front face 5024 of second page 5020" (Spec. 20: 15-18). We did not find any reference to "fixedly connected" as suggested by Appellant. According to one dictionary, there are several definitions of "mount," including "to put or have in position," "to attach to a support," "to arrange or assemble for use or display," "to prepare (something, such as a specimen) for examination or display." Merriam-Webster Dictionary, https://www.merriam-webster.com/ dictionary/mount (last visited May 22, 2018). Based on the Specification's discussion of inflatable objects "connected" to a page and the general definitions of mount, we construe the limitation "each of said at least two pages having at least one of said at least two inflatable objects mounted thereon" to mean that at least one inflatable 4 Appeal 2018-003 622 Application 14/422,006 object is connected to each page so that the inflatable object is displayed on the page. In light of this construction, Stevenson does not disclose "each of said at least two pages having at least one of said at least two inflatable objects mounted thereon" as recited in claim 1. Stevenson discloses "a pneumatic device designed to support books and volumes at a level plane." Stevenson Abstract. Stevenson's pneumatic device (i.e., the inflatable object) is not connected or attached to a page of the book, and is not displayed on the page. See id. at Fig. 2. Even under the Examiner's proposed definition of mounted (i.e., to place in position), Stevenson's pneumatic device is not placed in position on a page of the book and is not displayed by the page or book; instead, the entire book is placed on and displayed by the pneumatic device. For this reason, Stevenson does not disclose every limitation in claim 1, and the rejection of claim 1 is not sustained. We also do not sustain the rejection of claims 2, 4--12, and 18-25 which depend from claim I. Rejection 2: Claims 1, 2, 4-12, and 18-25 as Anticipated by Watrous The Examiner finds that Watrous discloses all of the limitations of claim 1, including "at least two pages having at least one of said at least two inflatable objects mounted thereon." Final Act. 3--4; Adv. Act. 2; Ans. 6-7. Using the same proposed construction for "mounted" to mean "to place in position" (Adv. Act. 2 (citing dictionary.com)) discussed in Rejection 1 above, the Examiner finds that Watrous discloses "at least two inflatable objects (multiple pages each with an inflatable article 60), each of said at 5 Appeal 2018-003 622 Application 14/422,006 least two pages having at least one of said at least two inflatable objects mounted thereon." Final Act. 4 (citing Watrous Fig. 4 ); Ans. 6-7. According to the Examiner, "inflatable objects 60 are indirectly connected to pages ... 16 through elements 58, 56 and 62 which engage with page 16." Ans. 7. Appellant again asserts that Examiner's rejection is erroneous because the "plain meaning of the term 'mounted"' is "fixedly connected" or "attached." Br. 17. As discussed above in Rejection 1, we construe the limitation "each of said at least two pages having at least one of said at least two inflatable objects mounted thereon" to mean that at least one inflatable object is connected to each page so that the inflatable object is displayed on the page. In light of this construction, Watrous does not disclose "each of said at least two pages having at least one of said at least two inflatable objects mounted thereon" as recited in claim 1. Watrous discloses inflatable characters 56 are "fitted air-tight over the nipple 54," which is part of manifold 24. See, e.g., Watrous 3:34--45. Inflatable characters 56 are displayed on manifold 24, not on page 16. See, e.g., id. at Fig. 4. Watrous' inflatable characters 56 (i.e., the inflatable object) are not connected or attached to page 16, and are not displayed on page 16. For this reason, Watrous does not disclose every limitation in claim 1, and the rejection of claim 1 is not sustained. We also do not sustain the rejection of claims 2, 4--12, and 18-25 which depend from claim 1. 6 Appeal 2018-003 622 Application 14/422,006 Re} ection 3: Claim 9 as Unpatentable over Stevenson and Watrous Claim 9 depends from claim 1. As discussed above, neither Stevenson nor Watrous discloses "each of said at least two pages having at least one of said at least two inflatable objects mounted thereon" as recited in claim 1. Thus, the rejection of claim 9 is not sustained. DECISION For the above reasons, the Examiner's rejections of claims 1, 2, 4--12, and 18-25 are REVERSED. REVERSED 7 Copy with citationCopy as parenthetical citation