Ex Parte Stadtler

Patent Trial and Appeal Board

Aug 10, 2016

13420017 (P.T.A.B. Aug. 10, 2016)

UNITED STA TES p A TENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
APPLICATION NO. FILING DATE
13/420,017 03/14/2012
3624 7590 08/12/2016
VOLPE AND KOENIG, P,C
UNITED PLAZA
30 SOUTH 17TH STREET, 18th Floor
PHILADELPHIA, PA 19103
FIRST NAMED INVENTOR
Georg Stadtler
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.
SMB-PT291.l
(P09047BUS)
CONFIRMATION NO.
7699
EXAMINER
KIM, CHRISTOPHER S
ART UNIT PAPER NUMBER
3752
NOTIFICATION DATE DELIVERY MODE
08/12/2016 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):
eoffice@volpe-koenig.com
PTOL-90A (Rev. 04/07)
UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
Exparte GEORG STADTLER
Appeal2014-004748
Application 13/420,017
Technology Center 3700
Before STEFAN STAICOVICI, LYNNE H. BROWNE, and
JAMES J. MAYBERRY, Administrative Patent Judges.
BROWNE, Administrative Patent Judge.
DECISION ON APPEAL
STATEMENT OF THE CASE
Georg Stadtler (Appellant) appeals under 35 U.S.C. § 134 from the
rejection of claims 16, 18, and 20 under 35 U.S.C. § 102(b) as anticipated by
Tada (US 4,350,298, iss. Sept. 21, 1982). We have jurisdiction under 35
U.S.C. § 6(b).
We REVERSE.
Appeal2014-004748
Application 13/420,017
CLAIMED SUBJECT MATTER
Claim 16, reproduced below, is illustrative of the claimed subject
matter:
16. A jet regulator (1 ), having a non-circular profile when
viewed in a flow direction, the jet regulator comprising a jet
regulator housing ( 4) configured to be inserted into a water outlet
(2) of a sanitary outlet fitting (3) from an outlet end side, the
housing ( 4) comprising an outermost perimeter having a
generally rectangular profile when viewed in a flow direction and
a latching part, which comprises at least one spring arm (5, 6)
integrally formed on an outer periphery of the jet regulator
housing (4), the at least one spring arm (5, 6) extending
tangentially away from the housing, in the flow direction, toward
a free arm end (7), the at least one spring arm (5, 6) being
resiliently biased away from the housing (4).
DISCUSSION
The Examiner finds that Tada discloses each and every limitation of
independent claim 16. See Final Act. 3. In particular, the Examiner finds
that Tada discloses "the at least one spring arm 146 extending away from the
housing 122, in the flow direction, toward a free arm end 148." Id. We note
that the Examiner does not address the limitation requiring "the at least one
spring arm (5, 6) being resiliently biased away from the housing (4)." See
Appeal Br. 24.
Appellant argues that
the Examiner ignores the recitation in claims 16 and 18 of "the
at least one spring arm (5, 6) being resiliently biased away from
the housing ( 4 )". Even assuming arguendo, that the arms 146
could be considered equivalent to the spring arms as claimed,
Tada does not teach that they are resiliently biased away from
the housing as claimed.
Id. at 15.
2
Appeal2014-004748
Application 13/420,017
Tada states:
The nozzle 122 is mounted on a foam dispenser body 134
and forms part of it. ... A pair of cantilever arms 146 with the
front cylinder 140 interposed therebetween extends out from the
nozzle 122. The nozzle cap 118 is slidably mounted on the body
134 since the arms 146 are inserted in through holes 132 of the
nozzle cap 118. As seen from FIG. 6, each of arms 146 has at
its free end a hook-shaped locking piece 148. The locking pieces
148 are so arranged that their width X 1 is smaller than the width
X2 of the respective through holes 132, and the maximum
distance Y 1 between both locking pieces is greater than the
distance Y2 between the through holes 132 as shown in FIG. 6.
Thus, when the arms 146 are inserted in the through holes 132,
they are deformed so that the respective free ends of the arms 146
are close to each other, and thereafter the arms 146 are returned
to their original shapes. The nozzle 122 then becomes locked in
place since the locking piece 148 is in contact with the front face
150 of the nozzle cap 118.
Tada 5: 16-53 (emphasis added). Thus, once Tada's foam dispenser body is
assembled, Tada's arms 146 are not biased in any direction, but rather are
locked in position. Accordingly, Tada fails to teach "at least one spring arm
being resiliently biased away from the housing," as required by claim
16. For this reason, we do not sustain the Examiner's decision rejecting
independent claim 16 as anticipated by Tada. Claim 18 similarly requires
"spring arms (5, 6) being resiliently biased away from the housing (4)."
Appeal Br. 25. Accordingly, we do not sustain the Examiner's decision
rejecting independent claim 18, and claim 20, which depends therefrom, as
anticipated by Tada.
DECISION
The Examiner's rejection of claims 16, 18, and 20 is REVERSED.
REVERSED
3