Ex Parte Gale et al

Patent Trial and Appeal Board

Jul 14, 2017

13618300 (P.T.A.B. Jul. 14, 2017)

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.
13/618,300 09/14/2012 Allan Roy Gale 83246017 9018
28395 7590 07/18/2017
RROOKS KTTSHMAN P C /FfTET EXAMINER
1000 TOWN CENTER PAIK, SANG YEOP
22ND FLOOR
SOUTHFIELD, MI 48075-1238 ART UNIT PAPER NUMBER
3742
NOTIFICATION DATE DELIVERY MODE
07/18/2017 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 @brookskushman.com
PTOL-90A (Rev. 04/07)
UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
Ex parte ALLAN ROY GALE, BRUCE CARVELL BLAKEMORE,
and PAUL THEODORE MOMCILOVICH
Appeal 2015-007628
Application 13/618,300
Technology Center 3700
Before EDWARD A. BROWN, WILLIAM A. CAPP, and
SEAN P. O’HANLON, Administrative Patent Judges.
CAPP, Administrative Patent Judge.
DECISION ON APPEAL
STATEMENT OF THE CASE
Appellants seek our review under 35 U.S.C. § 134 of the final
rejection of claims 1—12 and 20 under 35 U.S.C. § 102(b) as anticipated by
Vanderslice (US 5,362,942, iss. Nov. 8, 1994), and claims 14—19 as
unpatentable under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) over Vanderslice in combination with
either Ashtiani (US 7,382,102 B2, iss. June 3, 2008) or Kosugi (US
2013/0033232 Al, pub. Feb. 7, 2013). We have jurisdiction under 35
U.S.C. § 6(b).
We REVERSE.
Appeal 2015-007628
Application 13/618,300
THE INVENTION
Appellants’ invention relates to heating a vehicle battery. Spec. 11.
Claim 7, reproduced below with emphasis added, is illustrative of the subject
matter on appeal.
7. A system comprising:
an auxiliary battery electrically connected with an accessory
load; and
a controller configured to modulate a command for the
accessory load such that the auxiliary battery discharges and
outputs to the accessory load a discharge current having, in
addition to a current component for driving the accessory load,
an alternating current (AC) component, variable based on a
temperature of the auxiliary battery, to cause the temperature of
the auxiliary battery to increase.
OPINION
Anticipation of Claims 1—12 and 20
by Vanderslice
Claims 1—6 and 20
The Examiner finds that Vanderslice discloses all of the elements of
claim 1. Final Action 2—3. In particular, the Examiner finds that
Vanderslice’s auxiliary battery outputs an AC component to increase battery
temperature. Id.
Appellants traverse the Examiner’s rejection by arguing that
Vanderslice’s auxiliary battery does not output an AC component as
claimed. Appeal Br. A—5. Appellants argue that Vanderslice discloses AC
Heater Power Supply 27, a component that resides external to battery 10. Id.
In response, the Examiner states that, notwithstanding Vanderslice’s use of
AC Heater Power Supply 27, the auxiliary battery itself becomes the source
that subsequently supplies the AC current to its internal resistance R for
2
Appeal 2015-007628
Application 13/618,300
heating. Ans. 4. Having considered the competing positions of Appellants
and the Examiner, we agree with Appellants’ position.
Vanderslice discloses AC Heater Power Supply 27, a component that
resides external to battery 10. Vanderslice, Fig. 3. Vanderslice describes
the Figure 3 embodiment in the following terms.
FIG. 3 illustrates another embodiment of the invention, in
which an AC heater power supply 27 provides alternating
current (AC) to heat battery 10. AC current flow is provided
through blocking capacitor Cl to the internal resistor R of
battery 10. The AC current is in effect a ripple current
deliberately introduced for the purpose of battery heating. In
prior art, any AC ripple current has been deliberately
minimized. In this embodiment, the DC charger 18 is always
enabled by connecting the control input on conductor 22 to a
fixed logic level internal to temperature controller 16.
Blocking inductors FI and F2 isolate DC charger 18 and
load 34 from the AC component of the charging voltage,
thereby ensuring proper operation of the DC charger and
avoiding possible damage or interference to load 34. AC heater
power supply 27 is a low-impedance, low voltage, high current
AC voltage source, such as the secondary of a low-voltage, high
current transformer, preferably at a frequency of between 60 Hz
and 500 Khz. Higher frequencies are preferable to minimize
the size of capacitor Cl, inductors FI and F2, and may
maximize the real part of the impedance of resistor R, for
example, by the well-known high frequency skin effect of
electrical conductors.
In operation, AC heater power supply 27 is enabled by a
control signal on conductor 25, when temperature sensor 14 and
temperature controller 16 indicate a battery temperature below a
predetermined lower level. AC heater power supply 27 thus
heats battery 10.
Id. col. 4.11. 25—52 (emphasis added, bolding omitted).
For a prior art reference to anticipate a claim, it must disclose all of
the limitations of the claim “arranged or combined in the same way as in the
3
Appeal 2015-007628
Application 13/618,300
claim.” Net MoneyIN, Inc. v. VeriSign, Inc., 545 F.3d 1359, 1370 (Fed. Cir.
2008). In the instant case, Vanderslice’s battery receives AC current as an
input to the battery to cause the battery temperature to increase. In contrast,
claim 1 requires the auxiliary battery to output an AC component to cause
the battery temperature to increase. Claim 1 is patentably distinct from
Vanderslice because it outputs rather than inputs AC current to heat the
battery. Thus, the elements of Vanderslice are not “arranged in the same
way as in the claim.” Id.
Accordingly, we do not sustain the Examiner’s anticipation rejection
of claim 1, nor do we sustain the rejection of claims 2—6 and 20 that depend
therefrom.
Claims 7—12
Claim 7 is an independent claim and claims 8—12 depend directly
therefrom. Claims App. As with claim 1, claim 7 contains a limitation
directed to the auxiliary battery discharging and outputting a discharge
current having an AC component to increase battery temperature. Id. In
rejecting claim 7, the Examiner makes similar findings to those in
connection with the rejection of claim 1. Final Action 2—3.
The Examiner’s rejection of claim 7 suffers from the same infirmity
that we identified above with respect to claim 1. Accordingly, we do not
sustain the rejection of claim 7, nor do we sustain the rejection of claims 8—
12 that depend therefrom.
Unpatentability of Claims 14—19
over Vanderslice and either Ashtiani or Kosugi
Claim 14 is an independent claim and claims 15—19 depend directly
therefrom. Claims App. Claim 14 differs in scope from independent
4
Appeal 2015-007628
Application 13/618,300
claims 1 and 7 in that it is directed to a vehicle with an auxiliary battery
system rather than just a battery system. Id. The Examiner makes findings
similar to those for claims 1 and 7 with respect to Vanderslice, and then
relies on Ashtiani or, alternatively, Kosugi, to show that it was known to
provide a self-heating battery in a vehicle. Final Action 3.
The Examiner, however, makes no factual findings with respect to
either Ashtiani or Kosugi that cure the deficiency that we have noted above
with respect to the Vanderslice reference. Consequently, we do not sustain
the unpatentability rejection of claims 14—19.
DECISION
The decision of the Examiner to reject claims 1—12 and 14—20 is
reversed.
REVERSED
5