Ex Parte Demerath

Patent Trial and Appeal Board

Jun 11, 2018

13693068 (P.T.A.B. Jun. 11, 2018)

UNITED STA TES p A TENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
APPLICATION NO. FILING DATE
13/693,068 12/04/2012
151860 7590 06/13/2018
The Small Patent Law Group, LLC
225 S. Meramec Ave.
Suite 725
St. Louis, MO 63105
FIRST NAMED INVENTOR
Michael Demerath
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.
66612 (500-0316US1) 7708
EXAMINER
LIN,KO-WEI
ART UNIT PAPER NUMBER
3743
NOTIFICATION DATE DELIVERY MODE
06/13/2018 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):
docket@splglaw.com
PTOL-90A (Rev. 04/07)
UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
Ex parte MICHAEL DEMERATH
Appeal2017-009043
Application 13/693,068 1
Technology Center 3700
Before ANTON W. PETTING, JOSEPH A. FISCHETTI, and
PHILIP J. HOFFMANN, Administrative Patent Judges.
HOFFMANN, Administrative Patent Judge.
DECISION ON APPEAL
STATEMENT OF THE CASE
Pursuant to 35 U.S.C. § 134(a), Appellant appeals from the
Examiner's rejection of claims 2, 3, 6, 7, 17-19, and 23-25. We have
jurisdiction under 35 U.S.C. § 6(b ).
We REVERSE.
According to Appellant, the invention relates to an air vent that may
be used "in the climate control of the interior of a motor vehicle." Spec. 1,
1 According to Appellant, "[t]he real party in interest is ITW Fastener
Products GmbH." Appeal Br. 3.
Appeal2017-009043
Application 13/693,068
11. 7-8. Claims 19 and 23 are the independent claims on appeal. We
reproduce claim 19, below, as illustrative of the appealed claims.
19. An air vent comprising:
a housing having an outflow opening;
a plurality of vanes associated with the outflow opening,
each of the plurality of vanes being rotatably connected to the
housing at a swivel axis arranged near a front edge of each of the
plurality of vanes; and
at least three coupling members pivotally connected to
each of the plurality of vanes to connect the plurality of vanes
together such that movement of one of the plurality of vanes
results in movement of all of the plurality of vanes, the at least
three coupling members being spaced along a length of each of
the plurality of vanes and positioned rearward of the front edge
of each of the plurality of vanes.
REJECTION AND PRIOR ART
The Examiner rejects claims 2, 3, 6, 7, 17-19, and 23-25 under
35 U.S.C. § I03(a) as unpatentable over Gehring et al. (US 2006/0172680
Al, pub. Aug. 3, 2006) (hereinafter "Gehring") and Honer (US 2,755,524,
iss. July 24, 1956).
ANALYSIS
With respect to the Examiner's rejection of the claims, in the Final
Office Action, the Examiner finds that "[i]t would have been obvious ... to
modify Gehring by using plural coupling members as taught by Honer in
order to provide even load support across the louvers according to
requirement of louver length." Final Action 2.
2
Appeal2017-009043
Application 13/693,068
In the Appeal Brief, Appellant argues that, "Honer is non-analogous
art in relation to Gehring, as the functions of the vanes of Gehring ( air
flow control) within the confined space of a vehicle are wholly different than
sun-shading visor louvers on the outside of a large window of a building, as
disclosed in Honer." Appeal Br. 12.
In response, the Examiner maintains that the references are analogous
art because
[a]ccording to col[.] 1[,] lines 25-30 of Honer, Honer teaches
"adjustable louver boards ... permitting air through the window
and which can be closed to exclude wind." Honer teaches a
louver structure that can be opened to either permit airflow and
can be closed to restrict airflow through an opening. Therefore[,]
Honer discloses an air vent structure and is an analogous prior
art.
Answer 5---6.
Gehring is directed to air duct outlets with remotely located joystick
louver controls, where the air duct outlets are utilized within vehicles.
Gehring Title, ,r 2. Conversely, Honer "relates to louver assemblies for
building windows[,] and more particularly to an assembly adapted to be
disposed at the outer side of a window and having adjustable louver boards."
Honer 1, 11. 15-18. Because of the differences between vents used in
vehicles and those used on building windows (such as the size and length of
the overall assembly, and sizes and lengths of individual components of the
assembly), it is not apparent to us that all of the components used with
window vents, such as a third coupling member, would be used with vehicle
vents.
The two criteria for determining whether prior art is analogous are (1)
whether the art is from the same field of endeavor, regardless of the problem
3
Appeal2017-009043
Application 13/693,068
addressed, and (2) if the reference is not within the field of the inventor's
endeavor, whether the reference still is reasonably pertinent to the particular
problem with which the inventor is involved. In re Clay, 966 F.2d 656, 659
(Fed. Cir. 1992) (citing In re Deminski, 796 F.2d 436, 442 (Fed. Cir. 1986);
In re Wood, 599 F.2d 1032, 1036 (CCPA 1979)).
Here, the Examiner does not show if the Examiner determines if the
references are in the same field of endeavor and why, or, if the Examiner is
determining that the references are reasonably pertinent to the problem with
which the inventor is involved, there are no findings as to the particular
problem addressed. Therefore, we will not sustain the rejection.
DECISION
We REVERSE the Examiner's obviousness rejection of claims 2, 3, 6,
7, 17-19, and 23-25.
REVERSED
4