Ex Parte Höglund et al

Patent Trial and Appeal Board

Nov 15, 2018

13504555 (P.T.A.B. Nov. 15, 2018)

UNITED STA TES p A TENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
APPLICATION NO. FILING DATE
13/504,555 07/10/2012
140282 7590
Murtha Cullina LLP
One Century Tower
265 Church Street
New Haven, CT 06510
11/19/2018
FIRST NAMED INVENTOR
Kasper Hoglund
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.
6485-0102WOUS 8601
EXAMINER
WEILAND, HANS R.
ART UNIT PAPER NUMBER
3763
NOTIFICATION DATE DELIVERY MODE
11/19/2018 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):
ipdocketing@murthalaw.com
PTOL-90A (Rev. 04/07)
UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
Ex parte KASPER HOGLUND and MAGNUS LINGV ALL
Appeal2017-001794
Application 13/504,555 1
Technology Center 3700
Before STEFAN STAICOVICI, EDWARD A. BROWN, and
ARTHUR M. PESLAK, Administrative Patent Judges.
BROWN, Administrative Patent Judge.
DECISION ON APPEAL
STATEMENT OF THE CASE
Appellants seek review under 35 U.S.C. § 134(a) of the Examiner's
decision rejecting claims 14--27. 2 We heard oral argument on October 31,
2018. We have jurisdiction under 35 U.S.C. § 6(b).
We REVERSE.
1 Alfa Laval Corporate AB is identified as the real party in interest. Appeal
Br. 2.
2 Claims 1-13 are cancelled. Appeal Br. 4.
Appeal2017-001794
Application 13/504,555
CLAIMED SUBJECT MATTER
Appellants' disclosure "relates to a gasket locating arrangement, a use
of the gasket locating arrangements in a flow module, and a flow module,
preferably a plate reactor." Spec. ,r 1.
Claims 14, 23, and 24 are independent. Claim 14 is illustrative, and
reads:
14. A gasket locating arrangement for a flow module,
preferably plate reactor, comprising:
a gasket,
locating means,
a channel in a channel plate,
a barrier plate,
wherein the gasket consists of a sheet of soft gasket
material, and said sheet has a cut through pattern corresponding
to the channel in the channel plate,
the locating means are in the gasket, in the channel plate,
in the barrier plate or combinations thereof, which locating
means are selected from the group consisting of headed pins,
fitting pins, protruded pins, integrated pins, dowel pins, grooves,
holes, under cut recesses, thickened parts in the gasket material,
gasket deformation zones, wherein the locating means in the
gasket, in the channel plate, or in the barrier plate are fitted into
or to corresponding locating means in the gasket, in the channel
plate, in the barrier plate or in combinations thereof leaving a flat
surface together with the gasket between the channel plate and
the barrier plate when the gasket locating arrangement is
assembled for sealing the channel of the channel plate, and that
the cut through pattern in the gasket makes it possible for the
flow of media or the flow of fluids in the channel of the channel
plate to touch the barrier plate and to have no contacts with the
gasket's planar faces and little or minimized contact with any of
the gaskets edges.
Appeal Br. 28 (Claims App.).
2
Appeal2017-001794
Application 13/504,555
REJECTIONS
1. Claims 14, 15, and 17-27 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as
unpatentable over Hoglund3 (US 2008/0267845 Al, published Oct. 30,
2008), Choe (US 2007/0081923 Al, published Apr. 12, 2007), and
Korobchansky (GB 2 069 680 A, published Aug. 26, 1981).
2. Claim 16 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as unpatentable
over Hoglund, Choe, Korobchansky, and Berg (US 2,834,440, issued May
13, 1958).
ANALYSIS
Rejection 1
As for claim 14, the Examiner finds that Hoglund discloses a gasket
locating arrangement for a flow module, comprising a gasket (gasket 12), a
channel in a channel plate (flow plate 1 ), a barrier plate (plate 40), and a
locating means in the gasket and channel plate ( shaped gasket edge and
matching pattern of flow plate 1 forming an undercut recess). Non-Final
Act. 3. The Examiner finds that Hoglund does not disclose that gasket 12
has "a cut through pattern corresponding to the channel in the channel plate"
and that "the cut through pattern in the gasket makes it possible for the flow
of media or the flow of fluids in the channel of the channel plate to touch the
barrier plate and to have no contacts with the gasket's planar faces and little
or minimized contact with any of the gaskets edges," as claimed. Id. The
Examiner relies on Choe for teaching these missing limitations of Hoglund,
finding that Choe discloses a plate reactor comprising a gasket (gasket 210)
having a cut through pattern ( opening 212) corresponding to a channel
3 This spelling is used by the Examiner and Appellants and is also shown in
the "BIB DATA SHEET" of record in this application.
3
Appeal2017-001794
Application 13/504,555
(channel 23) in a channel plate (block 20). Id. at 4 (citing Choe ,r 74, Fig. 1).
The Examiner reasons that it would have been obvious to a person of
ordinary skill in the art to modify Hoglund's plate reactor and gasket to
incorporate cut through patterns in the gasket, as taught by Choe, to prevent
the gasket from affecting the formation of the flow passages. Id. ( citing
Choe ,r 74).
Hoglund discloses gasket 12 sandwiched between flow channel 2 and
plate 40. See Hoglund ,r 96, Fig. 19. Appellants contend that one skilled in
the art would understand that the only reason Choe' s gasket 210 has
openings 212 is to allow fluid flow through gasket 210 and through adjacent
upper block 10 and first unit block 20. Appeal Br. 20. Appellants assert
there is no flow through Hoglund's barrier plate 40, and one skilled in the art
would employ a gasket that seals across the entire face of the barrier plate
and would be discouraged from employing a cut through pattern in the
gasket. Id. Appellants contend that Hoglund and Choe fail to provide any
motivation or suggestion for modifying Hoglund's gasket 12 with a "cut
through pattern" to make it "possible for the flow of media or the flow of
fluids in the channel of the channel plate to touch the barrier plate," as
claimed. Id. To the contrary, Appellants contend, one skilled in the art
would not be motivated to create a cut through pattern so that fluid could
touch the barrier plate, at least because this modification would defeat the
sealing purpose of the gasket. Id.
Appellants' contentions are persuasive. The Examiner reasons that it
would have been obvious to a skilled artisan to modify Hoglund's gasket to
incorporate cut through patterns, as taught by Choe, "to prevent the gaskets
from affecting the formation of the flow passages as recognized by Choe ...
4
Appeal2017-001794
Application 13/504,555
where there are channels on both sides of the gasket (210) for use in a stack
reactor as taught by Choe." Ans. 16 (emphasis added). However, the
device shown in Figure 19 of Hoglund does not have channels on both sides
of gasket 12. In contrast, flow plate 1 on the bottom side of gasket 12
includes channels, but plate 40 on the top side of gasket 12 does not. See
Hoglund Fig. 19. Hoglund discloses that plate 40 is placed on top of gasket
12 "to close or seal flow channel [sic] of the multipurpose module." See id.
,r 96, Fig. 19. The Examiner does not identify any disclosure or suggestion
in Hoglund that plate 40 could alternatively contain channels. Nor has the
Examiner explained why one of ordinary skill in the art would have
modified plate 40 of Hoglund to result in Hoglund's device including
"channels on both sides of gasket [12]." Without channels in plate 40, the
Examiner has not explained persuasively why one of ordinary skill in the art
would, regardless, have modified gasket 12 to include the claimed "cut
through pattern corresponding to the channel in the channel plate," or to
include the "cut through pattern" to make it "possible for the flow of media
or the flow of fluids in the channel of the channel plate to touch the barrier
plate," as claimed. See Non-Final Act. 3.
Accordingly, the Examiner has not articulated an adequate reason
with a rational underpinning to modify the gasket of Hoglund to include "a
cut through pattern corresponding to the channel in the channel plate," in
which "the cut through pattern in the gasket makes it possible for the flow of
media or the flow of fluids in the channel of the channel plate to touch the
barrier plate and to have no contacts with the gasket's planar faces and little
or minimized contact with any of the gaskets edges," as claimed.
5
Appeal2017-001794
Application 13/504,555
The Examiner's use of Korobchansky's disclosure fails to cure the
deficiencies of the Hoglund and Choe combination discussed above. See
Non-Final Act. 4--5. Thus, we do not sustain the rejection of claim 14, or of
dependent claims 15 and 17-22, as unpatentable over Hoglund, Choe, and
Korobchansky.
Claim 23 recites a method of using gasket locating arrangements,
comprising providing a gasket locating arrangement comprising the
limitations recited in claim 14. See Appeal Br. 30-31 (Claims App.). We
do not sustain the rejection of claim 23 as unpatentable over Hoglund, Choe,
and Korobchansky for the same reasons discussed above for claim 14.
Claim 24 recites a flow module comprising at least one gasket
locating arrangement comprising the limitations recited in claim 14. See id.
31-32 (Claims App.). We do not sustain the rejection of claim 24, or of
claims 25-27 depending therefrom, as unpatentable over Hoglund, Choe,
and Korobchansky for the same reasons discussed above for claim 14.
Rejection 2
The Examiner's use of Berg's disclosure to reject dependent claim 16
fails to cure the deficiencies of the rejection of parent claim 14 discussed
above. Non-Final Act. 12. We do not sustain the rejection of claim 16 as
unpatentable over Hoglund, Choe, Korobchansky, and Berg for the same
reasons discussed above for the rejection of claim 14.
DECISION
We reverse the rejections of claims 14--27.
REVERSED
6