Ex Parte Feenstra

Patent Trial and Appeal Board

Jul 12, 2016

13015026 (P.T.A.B. Jul. 12, 2016)

UNITED STA TES p A TENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
APPLICATION NO. FILING DATE
13/015,026 01127/2011
27572 7590 07114/2016
HARNESS, DICKEY & PIERCE, PLC
P.O. BOX 828
BLOOMFIELD HILLS, MI 48303
FIRST NAMED INVENTOR
Shawn Feenstra
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.
6065-000043/US/DVB 1849
EXAMINER
CERNOCH, STEVEN MICHAEL
ART UNIT PAPER NUMBER
3752
NOTIFICATION DATE DELIVERY MODE
07/14/2016 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):
troymailroom@hdp.com
PTOL-90A (Rev. 04/07)
TJJ\.HTED STi\.TES Pi\. TENT i\.ND TP"-'ADElVLA.RK OFFICE
BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
Ex parte SHAWN FEENSTRA
Appeal2014-006477
Application 13/015,026
Technology Center 3700
Before JENNIFER D. BAHR, LINDA E. HORNER, and
BRANDON J. WARNER, Administrative Patent Judges.
HORNER, Administrative Patent Judge.
DECISION ON APPEAL
STATEMENT OF THE CASE
Shawn Feenstra (Appellant) seeks our review under 35 U.S.C. § 134
of the Examiner's decision rejecting claims 1 and 4, which are all of the
pending claims. We have jurisdiction under 35 U.S.C. § 6(b ).
We REVERSE.
Appeal2014-006477
Application 13/015,026
CLAIMED SUBJECT MATTER
Appellant's claimed subject matter "relates to a device for protecting
fusible linkages used in automatic sprinkler heads." Spec., para. 2. Claim 1
is the sole independent claim on appeal and is reproduced below.
1. In combination, a cover and a sprinkler head, the sprinkler
head comprising a fusible linkage mounted within a frame, the
fusible linkage comprising a protruding portion, the frame
comprising a pair of supporting arms that each connect with an
apex, the cover comprising:
a first member adjacent to the protruding portion of the
fusible linkage, the first member having a first connecting end
and a first fastening end opposite the first connecting end, the
first connecting end being adjacent to one of the pair of
supporting arms, the first fastening end being adjacent to the
other one of the pair of supporting arms, wherein the first
member has a means for receiving the protruding portion of the
fusible linkage and preventing misalignment of the protruding
portion of the fi.1sible li11kage; and
a second member opposite to the first member and having
a second connecting end and a second fastening end opposite the
second connecting end, the first and second connecting ends
being coupled to each other, and
means for releasably fastening the first and second
fastening ends so that said first member and said second member
wrap directly around said apex.
REJECTION
Appellant appeals from the Final Action, dated July 1, 2013 ("Final
Act."), in which the Examiner rejected claims 1 and 4 under 35 U.S.C.
§ 102(b) as anticipated by Vinson (US 6,669,111 B2, issued December 30,
2003).
2
Appeal2014-006477
Application 13/015,026
ANALYSIS
The Examiner found that that Vinson discloses a "sprinkler head
comprising a fusible linkage (30) mounted within a frame (32), the fusible
linkage comprising a protruding portion (31 )," as called for in claim 1. Final
Act. 2 (citing Vinson, Fig. 7B). Appellant argues that "Fig. 7B of Vinson
discloses a thermally responsive element 30 in the form of a glass bulb, not a
'fusible linkage', as claimed." Appeal Br. 4.
The Specification describes that a "fusible linkage 6 includes a first
pin 152, a second pin 158, and a fusible connection 163." Spec., para. 23;
see id., Figs. 1, 3. Based on the description of the invention provided in the
Specification, we understand a "fusible linkage" to include multiple pins or
links and a fusible connection. See also Reply Br. 4 (Appellants assert that
"a 'fusible linkage' ... include[s] multiple pins or linkages, such as a first
pin 152 and a second pin 158, and a fi1sible connection, such as the pair of
plates 164, 166, as shown in Fig. 3 of the present application"). 1
Vinson discloses that thermally operated sprinkler heads normally
include "at least one thermally responsive member such as a liquid tube or
bimetallic strip which mechanically reacts to heat such as through breakage
or thermal expansion to actuate other operating elements of the sprinkler
during operation." Vinson, col. 1, 11. 18-21. Figure 7B of Vinson depicts
sprinkler head 24 with thermally responsive member 30 in the shape of a
tube. The Examiner's finding that Vinson's thermally responsive member
1 Fusible plates 164, 166 that form fusible connection 163 are shown in
Figure 11 of the application. Spec., para. 23.
3
Appeal2014-006477
Application 13/015,026
30 is a fusible linkage is not supported by a preponderance of the evidence
because Figure 7B does not depict member 30 as having multiple pins or
links and a fusible connection. Based on our understanding of "fusible
linkage" discussed supra, the portion of Vinson relied on by the Examiner
does not disclose a "fusible linkage" as called for in independent claim 1.
Additionally, we find persuasive Appellant's argument that, "[t]o the
extent that Fig. 1 lB of Vinson (not cited by the Office Action) discloses a
fusible linkage 30, the cover 36 does not include first and second members
that wrap directly around the apex of the sprinkler 24, as claimed." Appeal
Br. 5 (emphasis added). This argument pertains to the last element of claim
1, which recites "means for releasably fastening the first and second
fastening ends so that said first member and said second member wrap
directly around said apex." Appellant's Specification describes that "[t]he
releasable fastener can comprise a latching pin 36 and a rece1vmg pin 38,''
wherein "latching pin 3 6 can extend from the second fastening end 3 0
toward the first fastening end 26 when the cover 2 is in a fastened
position." Spec., para. 26; see also id., Figs. 3--4 (depicting the cover in a
fastened position, such that the first and second members 14, 16 wrap
around, and directly contact, the apex of the sprinkler head). We construe
the means-plus-function language to be limited to the structures described in
the Specification (i.e., a latching pin and a receiving pin) and equivalents
thereof, for releasably fastening the fastening ends so that, when the cover is
in a fastened position, the first and second members wrap around, and
directly contact, the apex. See In re Donaldson Co., 16 F.3d 1189, 1194--95
(Fed. Cir. 1994) (en bane) ("[T]he 'broadest reasonable interpretation' that
4
Appeal2014-006477
Application 13/015,026
an examiner may give means-plus-function language is that statutorily
mandated in paragraph six. Accordingly, the PTO may not disregard the
structure disclosed in the specification corresponding to such language when
rendering a patentability determination.").
Vinson discloses a means for releasably fastening the cover to the
sprinkler head comprising a male stanchion 60 on the first member 3 8 and a
female slot 130 formed in the second member 40. Vinson, col. 14, 11. 3--4.
Figure 11 C shows that, in a fastened position, the first and second members
of the cover wrap around the sprinkler head. However, Vinson fails to show
that the first and second members wrap directly around (so as to contact) the
apex, as called for in claim 1.
For the above reasons, we do not sustain the rejection of claim 1 and
its dependent claim 4 under 35 U.S.C. § 102(b) as anticipated by Vinson.
DECISION
The decision of the Examiner to reject claims 1 and 4 is REVERSED.
REVERSED
5