Ex Parte Fischer et al

Patent Trial and Appeal Board

Oct 31, 2013

11495137 (P.T.A.B. Oct. 31, 2013)

UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARKOFFICE
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.
11/495,137 07/28/2006 Jorg-Achim Fischer A-4372 3676
24131 7590 11/01/2013
LERNER GREENBERG STEMER LLP
P O BOX 2480
HOLLYWOOD, FL 33022-2480
EXAMINER
HAGAN, SEAN P
ART UNIT PAPER NUMBER
2828
MAIL DATE DELIVERY MODE
11/01/2013 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 JORG-ACHIM FISCHER and
MICHAEL SCHOPLE
____________

Appeal 2011-007469
Application 11/495,137
Technology Center 2800
____________

Before EDWARD C. KIMLIN, CATHERINE Q. TIMM, and
ROMULO H. DELMENDO, Administrative Patent Judges.

KIMLIN, Administrative Patent Judge.

DECISION ON APPEAL

This is an appeal from the final rejection of claims 5, 6, 12, 15, 18, 20,
22, 23, and 25-30. We have jurisdiction under 35 U.S.C. § 6(b). Claim 5 is
illustrative:
5. A method for controlling a temperature of a laser module having
at least one laser diode driven in a modulated manner for imaging a printing
form in an exposer, and a Peltier element, which comprises the steps of:

cooling the laser module by leading heat from the laser module to the
Peltier element through a heat conduit; and

Appeal 2011-007469
Application 11/495,137

2
driving the Peltier element in an analog manner by using a bipolar
power unit driven digitally in a clocked manner in accordance with a
principle of pulse width modulation.

The Examiner relies upon the following references as evidence of
obviousness:
Reimer et al. (Reimer) 5,608,748 Mar. 4, 1997
Ichino US 2003/0231665 A1 Dec. 18, 2003
Rice 6,724,792 B2 Apr. 20, 2004

Sato JP 09-023035 A Jan. 21, 1997

Appellants' claimed invention is directed to a method for controlling a
temperature of a laser module. The method entails cooling the module by
leading heat away from the module to a Peltier element through a heat
conduit, and driving the Peltier element in an analog manner by using a
bipolar power unit driven digitally in a clocked manner in accordance with a
principle of pulse width modulation.
The appealed claims stand rejected under 35 U.S.C § 103(a) as
follows:
(a) claims 5, 6, and 26-29 over Rice in view of Ichino,
(b) claims 12, 18, 20, 22, 23, and 25 over Rice in view of Reimer and
Ichino,
(c) claims 15 over Rice in view of Reimer, Ichino and Sato, and
(d) claim 30 over Rice in view of Ichino and Sato.

Appellants do not separately argue any particular claim on appeal.
Accordingly, all the appealed claims stand or fall together with claim 5.
Appeal 2011-007469
Application 11/495,137

3
We have thoroughly reviewed each of Appellants' arguments for
patentability. However, it is our judgment that the Examiner's legal
conclusion of obviousness for the claimed subject matter is free of reversible
error. Accordingly, we will sustain the Examiner's rejection for the reasons
set forth in the Answer.
Appellants do not dispute the Examiner's factual determination that
Rice, like Appellants, discloses cooling a laser module by leading heat from
the module to a Peltier element through a heat conduit. The Examiner
appreciates that Rice does not teach driving the Peltier element in an analog
manner by using a bipolar unit driven digitally in a clocked manner in
accordance with a principle of pulse width modulation. However, the
Examiner finds that Ichino drives the Peltier element in the manner claimed
by disclosing that “[t]he temperature control circuit 31 generates an analog
signal 68 corresponding to the target temperature and sends this signal to the
Peltier drive circuit 32" [0037]). Appellants, on the other hand, although
acknowledging that the digital drive device of the present invention can be
driven depending on the temperature, contend that "Ichino does not disclose
driving the power unit is a clocked manner in accordance with a principle of
pulse width modulation" (Reply Br. 3, penultimate para.). Appellants,
however, do not address with persuasive factual evidence rather than mere
attorney arguments, the following factual finding of the Examiner:
In response to argument that the Peltier element of Ichino
is not driven according to the frequency or modulation of the
laser element, examiner notes that there is a direct causal effect
on the temperature of the laser element and the modulation of
that laser element and that any driving based on the detected
temperature of the laser element would also necessarily be
Appeal 2011-007469
Application 11/495,137

4
based on the modulation of the laser element. Following this
interpretation of what the claim, at its broadest, requires,
examiner concludes that the driving scheme utilized by Ichino
satisfies the basic requirement of the claim that the Peltier
device be driven in accordance with the principle of pulse width
modulation because the Peltier device is driven according to
detected temperature.

(Ans. 12, second para.).
Consequently, since the Examiner's position, which is reasonable on
its face, stands unrebutted by Appellants, it is accepted here. Appellants
have pointed to no error in the Examiner's finding that Ichino's driving of the
Peltier element based on the detected temperature of the laser element
necessarily results in a modulation of the laser element and a driving of the
Peltier device in accordance with the principle of pulse width modulation.
As a final point, we note that Appellants base no argument upon
objective evidence of nonobviousness, such as unexpected results.
In conclusion, based on the foregoing, the Examiner’s decision
rejecting the appealed claims is affirmed.
The decision of the Examiner is affirmed.
No time period for taking any subsequent action in connection with
this appeal may be extended under 37 C.F.R. § 1.136(a)(1)(iv).
AFFIRMED

cam