Ex Parte Gentet et al

Board of Patent Appeals and Interferences

Aug 22, 2012

10573642 (B.P.A.I. Aug. 22, 2012)

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.
10/573,642 08/20/2008 Guy Gentet 12928/10027 8964
23280 7590 08/22/2012
Davidson, Davidson & Kappel, LLC
485 7th Avenue
14th Floor
New York, NY 10018
EXAMINER
LEACH, ERIN MARIE BOYD
ART UNIT PAPER NUMBER
3646
MAIL DATE DELIVERY MODE
08/22/2012 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 GUY GENTET, ANGELO BEATI,
and JACQUES GAUTHIER
____________

Appeal 2010-008908
Application 10/573,642
Technology Center 3600
____________

Before LINDA E. HORNER, JAMES P. CALVE, and
HYUN J. JUNG, Administrative Patent Judges.

CALVE, Administrative Patent Judge.

DECISION ON APPEAL

STATEMENT OF THE CASE
Appellants appeal under 35 U.S.C. § 134 from the rejection of claims
15-28. App. Br. 2. Claims 1-14 have been canceled. We have jurisdiction
under 35 U.S.C. § 6.
We REVERSE.
Appeal 2010-008908
Application 10/573,642

2
CLAIMED SUBJECT MATTER
Claim 15 represents the claimed subject matter on appeal:
Claim 15: A nuclear fuel assembly comprising:
a group of nuclear fuel rods and a support skeleton, the assembly
comprising:
two nozzles;
guide tubes interconnecting the nozzles; and
spacer grids secured to the guide tubes and serving to hold the
rods; the nuclear fuels rods extending along a longitudinal direction
and being disposed in a substantially regular array;
the assembly including at least one support skeleton reinforcing
device disposed between two successive spacer grids and secured to
the guide tubes, and the reinforcing device being disposed inside the
group of rods and presenting a transverse extent that is less than the
transverse extent of the array of rods.

REJECTIONS
Claims 15-19 and 21-28 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 102(b) as
anticipated by Gallacher (US 5,625,657; iss. Apr. 29, 1997).
Claim 20 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as unpatentable over
Gallacher.
ANALYSIS
Claims 15-19 and 21-28 as anticipated by Gallacher
The Examiner found that Gallacher discloses a nuclear fuel assembly
with fuel rods 3,1 two nozzles (upper and lower tie plates 12, 26), guide
tubes 14, spacer grids 18 secured to the guide tubes 14 (fig. 2) and serving to
hold the fuel rods, and at least one skeleton reinforcing device (repair grid
50) disposed between two successive spacer grids 18 and inside the group of
fuel rods as shown in Figures 1 and 5B. Ans. 3-4. The Examiner also found

1 Gallacher discloses fuel rods as element 16 in Figure 1. Col. 3, ll. 35-38.
Appeal 2010-008908
Application 10/573,642

3
that the guide tubes 14 are secured to the fuel rods, which in turn are secured
to the reinforcing device 50, so that the guide tubes 14 are indirectly secured
to the reinforcing device 50. Ans. 4.
We agree with Appellants that Gallacher fails to disclose “at least one
support skeleton reinforcing device . . . secured to the guide tubes” as called
for in claim 15. App. Br. 4-5. The Examiner’s finding that the fuel rods 16
are secured to the reinforcing device (repair grid 50) is not supported by a
preponderance of evidence because Gallacher discloses that the fuel rods 16
can be slid into and out of the repair grid 50 to repair a damaged spacer cell.
Col. 2, ll. 58-67; App. Br. 4-5 (citing Gallacher, col. 5, ll. 9-44). We also
agree with Appellants that the term “secured” means “firmly fixed” or
“fastened” when interpreted in light of Appellants’ Specification (Reply Br.
2), which discloses that the reinforcing device 21 is secured to the guide
tubes 11 by welding the plates 23 of the reinforcing device 21 to the guide
tubes 11 at bulging zones 31 (fig. 2) or by welding the plates 23 to the guide
tubes 11 via welding tabs 33 (fig. 4). Spec. 7, ll. 14-21. This usage is
consistent with an ordinary and customary meaning of “secure” which
includes “firmly fastened” (see AMERICAN HERITAGE® DICTIONARY OF THE
ENGLISH LANGUAGE (2007)) and “to make fast” (see MERRIAM WEBSTER’S
COLLEGIATE® DICTIONARY (11th ed. 2005)). Because the fuel rods 16 are not
secured to the repair grid 50, the Examiner has not established that the guide
tubes 14 are secured to the repair grid 50 by virtue of being secured to the
fuel rods 16. As such, we cannot sustain the rejection of claims 15-19 and
21-28.

Appeal 2010-008908
Application 10/573,642

4
Claim 20 as unpatentable over Gallacher
The Examiner found that claim 20, which depends indirectly from
claim 15, is unpatentable as an obvious modification of the reinforcing grid
of Gallacher. Ans. 6-7. Because we do not sustain the rejection of claim 15
as anticipated by Gallacher, we also do not sustain the rejection of claim 20
as unpatentable over Gallacher where the Examiner’s proposed modification
of Gallacher to render obvious the subject matter of claim 20 does not
overcome the deficiencies of Gallacher as to claim 15 discussed supra.
DECISION
We REVERSE rejection of claims 15-28.

REVERSED
mls