Ex Parte Guentert et al

Patent Trial and Appeal Board

Oct 23, 2013

11894672 (P.T.A.B. Oct. 23, 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.
11/894,672 08/21/2007 Juergen Guentert 1001/0163PUS1 8223
60601 7590 10/23/2013
Muncy, Geissler, Olds & Lowe, PLLC
4000 Legato Road
Suite 310
FAIRFAX, VA 22033
EXAMINER
NEWAY, BLAINE GIRMA
ART UNIT PAPER NUMBER
3788
MAIL DATE DELIVERY MODE
10/23/2013 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 JUERGEN GUENTERT and
BERNARD SCHUHLER
____________________

Appeal 2011-010376
Application 11/894,672
Technology Center 3700
____________________

Before PHILLIP J. KAUFFMAN, PATRICK R. SCANLON, and
BART A. GERSTENBLITH, Administrative Patent Judges.

SCANLON, Administrative Patent Judge.

DECISION ON APPEAL
Appeal 2011-010376
Application 11/894,672

2
STATEMENT OF THE CASE
Appellants seek our review under 35 U.S.C. § 134 of the Examiner’s
rejection of claims 1-16 under 35 U.S.C. § 102(b) as being anticipated by
Peters (US 3,454,154, iss. Jul. 8, 1969). We have jurisdiction under
35 U.S.C. § 6(b).
We REVERSE.
THE INVENTION
Appellants’ invention relates to “a lead frame magazine cover for
closing of a lead frame magazine.” Spec. 1, ll. 2-3. Claims 1 and 9 are the
independent claims on appeal. Claim 1, reproduced below, is illustrative of
the claimed subject matter.
1. A lead frame magazine cover for closing an
opening of a lead frame magazine through which
lead frames are introduced into the lead frame
magazine, the lead frame magazine including
guide rails in lateral walls of the lead frame
magazine, the lead frame magazine cover
comprising:
a magazine cover configured for insertion
into the guide rails of the lead frame magazine, the
guide rail guiding the magazine cover in a closing
direction into the opening of the lead frame
magazine, the magazine cover including a recess
created in a region of a front edge of the magazine
cover in the closing direction of the magazine
cover.
Claim 9 is directed to a lead frame magazine arrangement comprising
a lead frame magazine and a magazine cover that includes “a recess created
in a region of a front edge of the magazine cover in the closing direction of
the magazine cover.”
Appeal 2011-010376
Application 11/894,672

3
ANALYSIS
In rejecting independent claims 1 and 9, the Examiner finds that
Peters discloses a magazine cover (cartridge 10) for closing an opening of a
lead frame magazine (standardized covered package or container 18) and
configured for insertion into guide rails (wire clip 12) of the lead frame
magazine. Ans. 4-5. The Examiner further finds that the magazine cover of
Peters includes a recess (central recessed portion 25) created in a region of a
front edge of the magazine cover. Id. The Examiner takes the position that
“the recess 25 of Peters is in a region of a front edge portion of cartridge 10
when it is oriented appropriately.” Ans. 7 (emphasis added).
Appellants argue that Peters’ central recessed portion 25 “cannot
correspond to the claimed ‘recess in a region of a front edge portion of the
magazine cover.’” App. Br. 5.
To determine whether Peters discloses the claimed recess, we first
must construe the meaning of the claim language “a region of a front edge of
the magazine cover.” Using “a region of a front edge” rather than just “a
front edge” produces broad language that does not require the claimed recess
to extend from the front edge in the manner shown in Appellants’ drawings.
Nevertheless, we construe “a region of a front edge,” in accordance with the
plain and ordinary meanings of the words, to mean a region of the magazine
cover that is closer to the cover’s front edge than it is to the edge opposite
the front edge. As such, the claim language “a region of a front edge of the
magazine cover” calls for a recess that is located in a region of the magazine
cover that is closer to a front edge of the cover.
Each cartridge 10 of Peters has a recessed floor 28 and a shoulder 26
formed on the underside thereof. Peters, col. 2, ll. 66-67; figs. 2, 3. Figures
Appeal 2011-010376
Application 11/894,672

4
2 and 3 show that the cartridges 10 have a generally rectangular
configuration defining four edges and a cut off corner 20. Recesses 14 for
accommodating the prongs of the wire clip 12 are formed in two opposing
edges of the cartridge 10. Id. at col. 2, ll. 42-44; figs. 2, 3. As its name
suggests, the central recessed portion 25 is formed in the center of the floor
28, equidistant from the respective edges of each pair of opposing edges. Id.
at figs. 2, 3. Therefore, regardless of which edge of the cartridge 10 is
deemed to be the “front edge,” the central recessed portion 25 is not located
in a region of such edge.
We do not agree with the Examiner’s contention that the central
recessed portion 25 is in a front edge region of the cartridge 10 “when it is
oriented appropriately.” The Examiner provides no indication of what is
meant by “oriented appropriately” or what orientation would result in the
central recessed portion 25 being in an edge region of the cartridge 10.
Furthermore, the Examiner has not identified which edge of the cartridge 10
would be the “front edge.”
In view of the above, the Examiner has not shown by a preponderance
of the evidence that Peters discloses the recess as recited in independent
claims 1 and 9. We accordingly do not sustain the Examiner’s rejection of
claims 1-16 as anticipated by Peters.
DECISION
We reverse the decision of the Examiner rejecting claims 1-16.

REVERSED
rvb