Ex Parte Straub et alDownload PDFPatent Trial and Appeal BoardSep 8, 201713904211 (P.T.A.B. Sep. 8, 2017) Copy Citation UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE 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 APPLICATION NO. FILING DATE FIRST NAMED INVENTOR ATTORNEY DOCKET NO. CONFIRMATION NO. 13/904,211 05/29/2013 Christian STRAUB 885_297 4334 25191 7590 09/08/2017 BURR & BROWN, PLLC PO BOX 7068 SYRACUSE, NY 13261-7068 EXAMINER BOUZIANE, SAID ART UNIT PAPER NUMBER 2837 MAIL DATE DELIVERY MODE 09/08/2017 PAPER 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. PTOL-90A (Rev. 04/07) UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE ________________ BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD ________________ Ex parte CHRISTIAN STRAUB and ROGER HUGLI ________________ Appeal 2016-008496 Application 13/904,211 Technology Center 2800 ________________ Before TERRY J. OWENS, BEVERLY A. FRANKLIN, and CHRISTOPHER L. OGDEN, Administrative Patent Judges. OWENS, Administrative Patent Judge. DECISION ON APPEAL STATEMENT OF THE CASE The Appellants appeal under 35 U.S.C. § 134(a) from the Examiner’s rejection of claims 1, 3–7, and 9–18. We have jurisdiction under 35 U.S.C. § 6(b). The Invention The Appellants claim an electrical switch and a method for electrical switch communication. Claim 1 is illustrative: 1. An electrical switch for an electrical appliance having an electric motor, the switch comprising a switch housing having two electrical supply connections, each directly connected to the supply voltage, two electrical motor connections, each directly connected to the electric motor for the supply of voltage to the electric motor, a switch contact system and a Appeal 2016-008496 Application 13/904,211 2 control electronics unit for executing control processes in the electrical appliance, wherein an entirety of the switch contact system and the control electronics unit is arranged and contained in the switch housing, with the control electronics unit being operated by means of a piece of software, the switch further comprising an interface for a data line for communication between the control electronics unit and an external device, wherein one of the two electrical motor connections is used as the interface for the data line, and wherein an internal data line is positioned between and electrically connects the one of the two electrical motor connections and the control electronics unit in the switch housing. The References Crowell US 2005/0011655 A1 Jan. 20, 2005 Straub US 2009/0200961 A1 Aug. 13, 2009 Malackowski US 2010/0061181 A1 Mar. 11, 2010 The Rejection Claims 1, 3–7 and 9–18 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 over Malackowski in view of Straub and Crowell. OPINION We reverse the rejection. We need address only the independent claims (1 and 7). Those claims require an electrical switch comprising a switch housing, a switch contact system and a control electronics unit, “wherein an entirety of the switch contact system and the control electronics unit is arranged and contained in the switch housing”. Malackowski discloses trigger switches (46, 47) mounted in a trigger switch housing (33) such that each trigger switch (46, 47)’s barrel (50) is aligned with a hermitically sealed control module (40) (¶¶ 71, 73, 75; Figs. 1, 2A). Each trigger switch (46, 47) has a magnet (56, 58, respectively) attached thereto such that depressing the trigger switch (46, 47) Appeal 2016-008496 Application 13/904,211 3 causes the associated magnet to move closer to the control module (40) without either the trigger switch (46, 47) or the magnet (56, 58) contacting the control module (40) (¶¶ 79, 81). Straub discloses a switch (5) comprising a switch housing (13) having therein a switch contact system (7) and a control electronics system (9) (¶ 20; Fig.). The Examiner finds (Final Act. 3): Malackowski does not disclose a switch contact system which is contained with the controller in the switch housing. However, Straub Fig. 1 shows a switch contact system (7) which is contained with the controller [9] in the switch housing (5) [sic, (13)]. Hence, it would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention, to modify the invention of Malackowski with the teaching [of] Straub to implement a switch contact system contained with the controller in the switch housing for the purpose of space compactness[.] Establishing a prima facie case of obviousness requires an apparent reason to modify the prior art as proposed by the Examiner. See KSR Int’l Co. v. Teleflex Inc., 550 U.S. 398, 418 (2007). The Examiner does not establish that in view of Malackowski’s disclosure that depressing each trigger switch (46, 47) causes its associated magnet (56, 58) to move closer to the hermitically sealed control module (40) without either the trigger switch (46, 47) or the magnet (56, 58) contacting the control module (40) (¶¶ 79, 81), Straub would have provided one of ordinary skill in the art with an apparent reason to place the entirety of a switch contact system in Malackowski’s control module (40) (which the Appeal 2016-008496 Application 13/904,211 4 Examiner relies upon as corresponding to the Appellants’ switch housing (Final Act. 2; Ans. 4)). Thus, the Examiner has not established a prima facie case of obviousness of the Appellants’ claimed electrical switch or method for electrical switch communication. DECISION/ORDER The rejection of claims 1, 3–7, and 9–18 under 35 U.S.C. § 103 over Malackowski in view of Straub and Crowell is reversed. It is ordered that the Examiner’s decision is reversed. REVERSED Copy with citationCopy as parenthetical citation