Ex Parte Zacher et al

Patent Trials and Appeals Board

Mar 15, 2019

14428372 - (D) (P.T.A.B. Mar. 15, 2019)

UNITED STA TES p A TENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
APPLICATION NO. FILING DATE
14/428,372
96897 7590
THOTPATENT
POS1FACH 10 17 56
RATINGEN, 40837
GERMANY
03/16/2015
03/18/2019
FIRST NAMED INVENTOR
Wolfgang Zacher
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.
TS/PIEP 1504 US-PAT 4523
EXAMINER
TREMARCHE, CONNOR J.
ART UNIT PAPER NUMBER
3746
MAIL DATE DELIVERY MODE
03/18/2019 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 WOLFGANG ZACHER and RENE PATZNER
Appeal2018-006608
Application 14/428,372 1
Technology Center 3700
Before PHILIP J. HOFFMANN, KENNETH G. SCHOPPER, and
AMEE A. SHAH, Administrative Patent Judges.
HOFFMANN, Administrative Patent Judge.
DECISION ON APPEAL
STATEMENT OF THE CASE
Pursuant to 35 U.S.C. § 134(a), Appellants appeal from the
Examiner's rejection of claims 12-22. We have jurisdiction under 35 U.S.C.
§ 6(b).
We REVERSE.
According to Appellants, the "invention relates to an electric split-
case or canned coolant pump with an electric drive motor and a pump
module." Substitute Spec. ,r 1. Claim 12 is the sole independent claim
under appeal. Below, we reproduce the independent claim as illustrative of
the appealed claims.
1 Appellants identify "Pierburg Pump Technology GmbH" as the real party
in interest. Appeal Br. 2.
Appeal2018-006608
Application 14/428,372
12. An electric canned coolant pump comprising:
an electric drive motor comprising a split case provided as
a separating can, the split case being configured to separate a wet
chamber, in which a fluid to be conveyed is provided, from a dry
chamber, the separating can comprising a separating can form-
fit structure;
a pump module configured to be driven by the electric
drive motor;
a motor rotor configured to be permanently excited, the
motor rotor being arranged in the wet chamber;
a motor stator configured to be electronically commutated,
the motor stator being arranged in the dry chamber;
a Hall sensor arranged on the separating can, the Hall
sensor being configured to detect a position of the motor rotor in
the dry chamber, the Hall sensor comprising a sensor head and
Hall sensor electric connecting lines which are configured to be
rigid; and
a positioning element comprising positioning element
electric connecting lines which are configured to be rigid, the
positioning element electric connecting lines being connected
with the corresponding Hall sensor electric connecting lines, the
positioning element electric connecting lines comprising a
connecting body comprising a connecting body form-fit
structure, the connecting body being configured to be electrically
insulating and to hold the positioning element electric connecting
lines,
wherein, the separating can form-fit structure and the
connecting body form-fit structure are configured so as to
directly fix the connecting body on the separating can in a
defined position.
2
Appeal2018-006608
Application 14/428,372
REJECTIONS AND PRIOR ART
The Examiner rejects the claims as follows:
I. Claims 12-16, 18-20, and 22 under 35 U.S.C. § I03(a) as
unpatentable over Masakuni (JP 4760527 B2, pub. June 17,
2011),2 and Bobay et al. (US 6,354,162 Bl, iss. Mar. 12, 2002)
(hereinafter "Bobay");
II. Claim 17 under 35 U.S.C. § I03(a) as unpatentable over
Masakuni, Bobay, and Seffemick et al. (US 2006/0169061 Al,
pub. Aug. 3, 2006) (hereinafter "Seffemick"); and
III. Claim 21 under 35 U.S.C. § I03(a) as unpatentable over
Masakuni, Bobay, and Yang et al. (US 2009/0309441 Al, pub.
Dec. 17, 2009) (hereinafter "Yang").
ANALYSIS
Reiection I
As set forth, independent claim 12 recites, in part,
[a] coolant pump comprising ...
an electric drive motor comprising a split case provided as
a separating can, the split case being configured to separate a wet
chamber, in which a fluid to be conveyed is provided, from a dry
chamber, the separating can comprising a separating can form-
fit structure;
a Hall sensor arranged on the separating can, the Hall
sensor being configured to detect a position of the motor rotor in
the dry chamber, the Hall sensor comprising a sensor head and
2 When we refer to Masakuni, we refer to the English-language translation.
3
Appeal2018-006608
Application 14/428,372
Hall sensor electric connecting lines which are configured to be
rigid; and
a positioning element comprising positioning element
electric connecting lines which are configured to be rigid, the
positioning element electric connecting lines being connected
with the corresponding Hall sensor electric connecting lines, the
positioning element electric connecting lines comprising a
connecting body comprising a connecting body form-fit
structure, the connecting body being configured to be electrically
insulating and to hold the positioning element electric connecting
lines,
wherein, the separating can form-fit structure and the
connecting body form-fit structure are configured so as to
directly fix the connecting body on the separating can in a
defined position.
Appeal Br., Claims App. Restated, claim 12 recites that the Hall sensor's
connecting body form-fit structure is configured to directly fix the Hall
sensor connecting body on the separating can's form-fit structure, such that
the Hall sensor is directly fixed in a defined position on the separating can.
The Examiner's rejection of claim 12 relies on a combination of
Masakuni and Bo bay. See, e.g., Answer 2. With reference to its Figures 2
and 8, the Examiner finds that Masakuni discloses (using the claim's
nomenclature) a coolant pump provided with separating can 20, and Hall
sensor 6/9/10 arranged on separating can 20. Id. at 2-3. The Examiner
relies on Bobay to disclose a Hall sensor connecting body form-fit structure
that is configured to directly fix the Hall sensor connecting body to a
corresponding form-fit structure. Id. at 3. According to the Examiner, based
on Bobay's disclosure, it would have been obvious to modify Masakuni such
that separating can 20 and Hall sensor 6/9/10 include corresponding form-fit
4
Appeal2018-006608
Application 14/428,372
structures, which would directly fix Hall sensor 6/9/10 in a defined position
on separating can 20. Id. at 4.
Appellants argue that the Examiner's proposed combination is in
error. See Appeal Br. 8-12. Based on our review, we agree with
Appellants. As Appellants point out, Masakuni' s Figure 8 shows that Hall
sensor "9 is ... affixed to control board 7, with ... [Hall sensor] 9 ...
wedged between control board 7 and ... separating can [20]." Appeal Br. 8.
As shown in its Figure 2, "Masakuni manufactures its electric canned pump
by using ... resin 8 to make absolutely sure that the various components of
the Masakuni can pump are permanently affixed to each other." Id. at 11
( citing Masakuni Abstract, ,r,r 2, 3, 8, 12, 17, 22, 29) ( emphasis omitted).
Masakuni, in paragraphs 31 and 33,
further describe[s,] together with Fig[ure] 9, how ... resin 8 is
injected via injection port 32 using upper mold 28 and molding
die 27 to make absolutely sure that "the deviation of the
mounting position of the position detection sensor 6" is
prevented. This is furthermore important for the Masakuni pump
which is to be used in a bathtub to circulate hot water. See
Masakuni, paragraph [ 41] and Fig[ ure] 1.
Id. ( emphasis in original omitted and emphasis added). Thus, to summarize,
in Masakuni, resin secures the Hall sensor between the separating can and
the control board, making the Hall sensor irremovable from the control
board, and presumably protecting the control board and Hall sensor from
unintended contact with water during use of the pump.
Further, to the extent that Bobay shows a Hall sensor's connecting
body form-fit structure that is configured to directly fix the Hall sensor
connecting body to a corresponding form-fit structure, Bobay discloses an
electric motor, rather than a coolant pump with a separating can. Bobay
5
Appeal2018-006608
Application 14/428,372
col. 1, 11. 5-7; see Appeal Br. 10. Thus, because Bobay does not show
anything connected to a separating can, Bobay does not show corresponding
form-fit structures that directly fix a Hall sensor to a separating can.
The Examiner's reason for the proposed combination is "to more
securely mount the sensor while providing the ability to replace the sensor
easily." Answer 4. It is not clear, however, that the combination of
Masakuni and Bobay would more securely mount the Hall sensor as
compared to Masakuni' s disclosed mounting of the Hall sensor to the control
board, and the use of resin to seal the Hall sensor, control board, and
separating can together. Further, Masakuni appears to choose water
protection and permanent fixation over replaceability. Thus, in view of the
foregoing, the Examiner does not provide an articulated reasoning with some
rational underpinning sufficient to establish that it would have been obvious
to omit Masakuni's resin, and instead provide Masakuni's Hall sensor and
separating can with corresponding form-fit structures. See KSR Int'! Co. v.
Teleflex Inc., 550 U.S. 398,418 (2007).
Based on the foregoing, we do not sustain the Examiner's obviousness
rejection of claim 12. For similar reasons, we do not the rejections of
claims 13-16, 18-20, and 22 that depend from, and the Examiner rejects
with, claim 12.
Rei ections II and III
Claims 17 and 21 depend from claim 12. The Examiner does not rely
on either Seffemick or Yang to remedy the above-discussed deficiency in
claim 12's rejection. Therefore, we do not sustain either of the Examiner's
obviousness rejections of claims 17 and 21.
6
Appeal2018-006608
Application 14/428,372
DECISION
We REVERSE the Examiner's rejections of claims 12-22.
REVERSED
7