Ex Parte Cesaroni

Patent Trial and Appeal Board

Sep 14, 2018

12137414 (P.T.A.B. Sep. 14, 2018)

UNITED STA TES p A TENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
APPLICATION NO. FILING DATE
12/137,414 06/11/2008
23598 7590 09/18/2018
BOYLE FREDRICKSON S.C.
840 North Plankinton A venue
MILWAUKEE, WI 53203
UNITED ST A TES OF AMERICA
FIRST NAMED INVENTOR
Anthony J. Cesaroni
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.
3277.001 7472
EXAMINER
ZHANG, JENNA
ART UNIT PAPER NUMBER
3763
NOTIFICATION DATE DELIVERY MODE
09/18/2018 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):
docketing@boylefred.com
PTOL-90A (Rev. 04/07)
UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
Ex parte ANTHONY J. CESARONI
Appeal2017-003510
Application 12/137,414
Technology Center 3700
Before: ANNETTE R. REIMERS, NATHAN A. ENGELS, and
PAUL J. KORNICZKY, Administrative Patent Judges.
ENGELS, Administrative Patent Judge.
DECISION ON APPEAL
STATEMENT OF THE CASE
Appellant appeals under 35 U.S.C. § 134(a) from a rejection of claims
1-23, 25, 27, 31-33, and 36-44. No other claims are pending. We have
jurisdiction under 35 U.S.C. § 6(b ).
We reverse.
Appeal2017-003510
Application 12/137,414
ILLUSTRATIVE CLAIM
Claim 1, reproduced below, is the sole independent claim at issue and
is illustrative of the claimed subject matter:
1. A body temperature controlling system comprising:
at least one member receiving a flow of gas from a
manifold in communication with said at least one member, said
at least one member directing said flow of gas onto a wearer
thereof; and
at least one wearable thermo-electric device in
communication with the manifold, said flow of gas passing over
at least one of a cold side and a hot side of said at least one
wearable thermo-electric device, the manifold comprising:
at least one blower and at least one heat exchanger, said at
least one heat exchanger comprising a cross-over heat exchanger
configured to cool said flow of gas using a return flow of gas
previously passed over said cold side of said at least one
wearable thermoelectric device and previously directed onto the
wearer,
wherein said body temperature controlling system is
wearable.
THE REJECTIONS
Claims 1--4, 10, 11, 13, 14, 18, 20-22, 25, 27, 31-33, 36, and29--42
stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § I03(a) as being unpatentable in view of
Winkle (US 2003/0098143 Al; publ. May 29, 2003) and Harvie (US
2004/0159109 Al; publ. Aug. 19, 2004).
Claims 5-9 and 12 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § I03(a) as being
unpatentable in view of Winkle, Harvie, and Blackstone (US 6,993,930 B2;
iss. Feb. 7, 2006).
Claims 15, 16, and 19 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § I03(a) as
being unpatentable in view of Winkle, Harvie, and Monk (US 2009/0308082
Al; publ. Dec. 17, 2009).
2
Appeal2017-003510
Application 12/137,414
Claim 17 stands rejected under 35 U.S.C. § I03(a) as being
unpatentable in view of Winkle, Harvie, Monk, and Sutter (US
2002/0157815 Al; publ. Oct. 31, 2002).
Claim 23 stands rejected under 35 U.S.C. § I03(a) as being
unpatentable in view of Winkle, Harvie, and Munters et al. (US 4,002,040;
Jan. 11, 1977).
Claims 37, 38, and 43 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § I03(a) as
being unpatentable in view of Winkle, Harvie, and Strauss et al. (US
6,187,327 Bl; Feb. 20, 2001).
ANALYSIS
Appellant argues the Examiner erred in finding that the prior art
teaches or suggests "a cross-over heat exchanger configured to cool said
flow of gas using a return flow of gas previously passed over said cold side
of said at least one wearable thermoelectric device and previously directed
onto the wearer" as required by claim 1. Appeal Br. 10. The Examiner
responds that "Harvie is relied upon for disclosing ... a thermoelectric
device being wearable and for circulation of air wherein air previously
passed over the cold side of the thermoelectric device and previously
directed to the wearer." Ans. 3. According to the Examiner, Harvie teaches
removing heat from a wearer's vest by drawing air from inside the vest out
through an exhaust duct, past the cold side of a heat exchanger to cool the
air, and then returning the cooled air to the vest to cool the user. Ans. 3--4;
see Ans. 4--5 (stating that Winkle in view of Harvie teaches "cooling of a
flow of gas previously passing through the cold side of the thermoelectric
device").
3
Appeal2017-003510
Application 12/137,414
Having considered the Examiner's rejection in light of the evidence of
record and Appellant's arguments, we determine that the Examiner erred in
the rejection of claim 1. Claim 1 requires "using a return flow of gas" to
cool a separate "flow of gas from a manifold" in a heat exchanger. As
context for the disputed limitation, the Specification explains that when
return air from the vest is cooler than warm, incoming ambient air, "[t]he
purpose of this heat exchanger ... is to pre-cool the warm incoming air with
exhaust air that has already been cooled in the internal environment of the
system." Spec. 12.
As argued by Appellant, Harvie discloses drawing air from a wearer's
vest and re-cooling that air with a liquid-cooled condenser before returning
the same air to the wearer's vest. See Reply Br. 4--5 (citing Harvie ,r 134).
We agree with Appellant that Harvie does not teach or suggest using a return
flow of gas to cool a separate flow of gas, as claimed. See Appeal Br. 12;
Reply Br. 2--4.
Because we find the Examiner erred in the rejection of independent
claim 1, we do not sustain the Examiner's rejection of claim 1. We
determine the same error exists in the rejections of dependent 2-23, 25, 27,
31-33, and 36-44, and we do not sustain the Examiner's rejection of those
claims for the same reasons.
DECISION
We reverse the Examiner's rejection of claims 1-23, 25, 27, 31-33,
and 36-44.
REVERSED
4