Ex Parte Uchikubo et alDownload PDFBoard of Patent Appeals and InterferencesJul 17, 201210961987 (B.P.A.I. Jul. 17, 2012) 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. 10/961,987 10/08/2004 Akinobu Uchikubo 18310 7774 23389 7590 07/17/2012 SCULLY SCOTT MURPHY & PRESSER, PC 400 GARDEN CITY PLAZA SUITE 300 GARDEN CITY, NY 11530 EXAMINER JOHNSON III, HENRY M ART UNIT PAPER NUMBER 3769 MAIL DATE DELIVERY MODE 07/17/2012 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 BOARD OF PATENT APPEALS AND INTERFERENCES ____________________ Ex parte AKINOBU UCHIKUBO, MASAKAZU GOTANDA, and TAKEAKI NAKAMURA ____________________ Appeal 2010-004270 Application 10/961,987 Technology Center 3700 ____________________ Before: JENNIFER D. BAHR, WILLIAM V. SAINDON, and MICHAEL J. FITZPATRICK, Administrative Patent Judges. SAINDON, Administrative Patent Judge. DECISION ON APPEAL Appeal 2010-004270 Application 10/961,987 2 STATEMENT OF THE CASE Appellants appeal under 35 U.S.C. § 134 from the Examiner’s decision rejecting claims 1-14. We have jurisdiction under 35 U.S.C. § 6(b). We AFFIRM. The Claimed Subject Matter Claim 1, reproduced below with added emphasis, is illustrative of the claimed subject matter. 1. An operation support system in which an operation device portion and a support device portion are connected each other through a communication line, wherein the operation device portion comprises a controller which controls a plurality of medical devices and a signal transmitting device which transmits data to the support device portion side with a communication protocol to be transmitted to the communication line and receives data from the support device portion side, wherein the controller comprises a transmitting-data storing portion which stores predetermined data from control data of the plurality of medical devices as data to be transmitted, an address storing portion which stores an address on the communication line of the support device portion, and a data transmitting control portion which transmits the data to be transmitted to the support device portion through the communication line, and wherein the data transmitting control portion reads the address from the address storing portion upon monitoring the control data and finding change on the transmitting data, and transmits the transmitting data which is changed therein to the support device portion through the communication line. Appeal 2010-004270 Application 10/961,987 3 Rejections I. Claims 1, 2, 4, 6, 7, and 11-14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 102(e) as anticipated by Uchikubo ‘185 (US 6,602,185 B1, iss. Aug. 5, 2003). II. Claims 1, 3, 5, and 8-10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as unpatentable over Uchikubo ‘318 (JP 2000-270318, pub. Sep. 29, 2000), Honda (US 2002/0115917 A1, pub. Aug. 22, 2002), and Pike (US 5,685,821, iss. Nov. 11, 1997). OPINION With respect to Rejection I, Appellants argue independent claims 1, 11, and 14 as a first group. App. Br. 13-15. With respect to Rejection II, Appellants rely on the argument presented for the first group. App. Br. 15. Similarly, with respect to the dependent claims (for both rejections), Appellants rely on the argument presented for the first group. App. Br. 15- 16. We select claim 1 as representative of the first group, and note that the disposition of the issue with this claim will control the disposition of the appeal. Independent claim 1 requires, in relevant part, an operation support system having a controller that “transmits the transmitting data which is changed.” The Examiner found that Uchikubo ‘185 describes a controller transmitting data in real time. Ans. 5 (citing Uchikubo ‘185, col. 9, ll. 40- 48). Appellants argue that Uchikubo ‘185 does not disclose or suggest “sending/receiving support information in real time while optimizing traffic by transmitting only data to be transmitted among control data.” App. Br. 14; Reply Br. 3. However, as the Examiner correctly points out, the claim does not require that only the changed data is transmitted. See Ans. 5. Appeal 2010-004270 Application 10/961,987 4 Instead, the claim merely requires the transmitting control portion of the controller to transmit changed data. If Uchikubo ‘185 transmits the data in real time, then it transmits both changed and unchanged data. Thus, Uchikubo ‘185 discloses a controller that transmits changed data. Accordingly, Appellants’ arguments are not commensurate in scope with the claim and do not apprise us of error in the Examiner’s rejection. As such, we sustain the Examiner’s rejection of claim 1 as anticipated by Uchikubo ‘185. Claims 11 and 14 fall therewith. Because Appellants rely on the unpersuasive arguments addressed above for the rejections of the remaining claims, Appellants have not apprised us of error in the rejections of those claims. DECISION We affirm the Examiner’s decision regarding the anticipation rejection of claims 1, 2, 4, 6, 7, and 11-14. We affirm the Examiner’s decision regarding the obviousness rejection of claims 1, 3, 5, and 8-10. 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 hh Copy with citationCopy as parenthetical citation