Gary D. RobergeDownload PDFPatent Trials and Appeals BoardOct 1, 201915243249 - (D) (P.T.A.B. Oct. 1, 2019) 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. 15/243,249 08/22/2016 Gary D. Roberge 94450US01; 67097-3436PUS1 4533 54549 7590 10/01/2019 CARLSON, GASKEY & OLDS/PRATT & WHITNEY 400 West Maple Road Suite 350 Birmingham, MI 48009 EXAMINER RUPPERT, ERIC S ART UNIT PAPER NUMBER 3763 NOTIFICATION DATE DELIVERY MODE 10/01/2019 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): ptodocket@cgolaw.com PTOL-90A (Rev. 04/07) UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD Ex parte GARY D. ROBERGE Appeal 2019-002564 Application 15/243,249 Technology Center 3700 Before STEFAN STAICOVICI, BRETT C. MARTIN, and WILLIAM A. CAPP, Administrative Patent Judges. MARTIN, Administrative Patent Judge. DECISION ON APPEAL STATEMENT OF THE CASE Pursuant to 35 U.S.C. § 134(a), Appellant,1 United Technologies Corporation, appeals from the Examiner’s decision to reject claims 1, 4–16, and 24, the only claims currently pending in the application. We have jurisdiction under 35 U.S.C. § 6(b). We REVERSE. 1 We use the word “Appellant” to refer to “applicant” as defined in 37 C.F.R. § 1.42(a). Appellant identifies the real party in interest as United Technologies Corp. Appeal Br. 1. Appeal 2019-002564 Application 15/243,249 2 CLAIMED SUBJECT MATTER The claims are directed “to heat exchangers for use in aircraft, and more specifically to an aircraft heat exchanger constructed at least partially of stacked panels.” Spec. ¶ 1. Claim 1, reproduced below, is illustrative of the claimed subject matter: 1. A heat exchanger comprising: a heat exchanger body comprising a plurality of stacked panels defining an internal manifold and an external manifold; each of said stacked panels including an internal structure partially defining the internal manifold, an external structure partially defining the external manifold, and a plurality of ribs connecting the internal structure to the external structure; wherein each of said ribs further comprises a channel protruding into said rib and being paired with a corresponding rib of an adjacent panel, such that each of said ribs and the corresponding rib defining a tortuous cooling passage fluidly connecting the internal manifold to the external manifold, the tortuous cooling passage being in plane with a pair of said stacked panels and being configured to allow thermal growth of the passage without requiring thermal growth of the external manifold; and each of said stacked panels being bonded to at least one adjacent stacked panel. REFERENCES The prior art relied upon by the Examiner is: Menzel Stein Östbo Martin US 1,669,062 US 3,785,435 US 4,285,397 US 4,431,050 May 8, 1928 Jan. 15, 1974 Aug. 25, 1981 Feb. 14, 1984 Barone US 2009/0049794 A1 Feb. 26, 2009 Appeal 2019-002564 Application 15/243,249 3 REJECTIONS Claims 1, 7, 9–11, 16, and 24 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable over Stein and Martin. Ans. 3. Claim 4 stands rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable over Stein, Martin, and Barone. Ans. 6. Claims 5, 6, 8, 12, and 15 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable over Stein, Martin, and Östbo. Ans. 7. Claims 13 and 14 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable over Stein, Martin, and Menzel. Ans. 9. OPINION The main issue in this case boils down to claim construction. The phrase at issue is “cooling passage . . . being configured to allow thermal growth of the passage without requiring thermal growth of the external manifold.” The Examiner finds that this element is met by Stein’s teaching of inhibiting thermal growth of the external manifold. Ans. 11–12. Appellant argues that “even if Stein discloses inhibiting thermal growth of the frame, this acknowledges that there is still thermal growth of the frame” and that “[t]here is no teaching within Stein that the cooling passages of Stein are configured to allow thermal growth without requiring thermal growth of the external manifold (the frame).” App. Br. 4. The Examiner “finds Appellant[’]s claim construction to be unreasonably narrow” because the claim language at issue does not state “without requiring any thermal expansion.” Ans. 11. Appellant argues, and we agree that, “[u]nder a plain English interpretation of the term ‘without requiring thermal growth[,]’ if any thermal growth is required [then] the Appeal 2019-002564 Application 15/243,249 4 claim limitation is not met.” We see no difference between “without requiring any thermal expansion [or growth]” and “without requiring thermal [expansion or growth].” Essentially, we interpret the claims to mean that all thermal growth or expansion of the manifold/frame is prohibited in order to meet the claims. The Examiner finds only that Stein inhibits thermal growth, which, as Appellant points out, implies that some growth occurs. Accordingly, Stein’s inhibiting does not reach the level of prohibiting necessary to meet the claims. All of the Examiner’s rejections rely on this improper claim construction of the phrase at issue. As such, we do not sustain any of the prior art rejections. DECISION The Examiner’s rejections are REVERSED. DECISION SUMMARY Claims Rejected Basis Affirmed Reversed 1, 7, 9–11, 16, 24 § 103 over Stein and Martin None 1, 7, 9–11, 16, 24 4 § 103 over Stein, Martin, and Barone None 4 5, 6, 8, 12, 15 § 103 over Stein, Martin, and Östbo None 5, 6, 8, 12, 15 13, 14 § 103 over Stein, Martin, and Menzel None 13, 14 Overall Outcome 1, 4–16, 24 REVERSED Copy with citationCopy as parenthetical citation