Ex Parte Jeong et al

Patent Trial and Appeal Board

Dec 14, 2012

11295625 (P.T.A.B. Dec. 14, 2012)

UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARKOFFICE
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.
11/295,625 12/07/2005 Hae Deog Jeong 9988.283.00 9193
7590 12/17/2012
MCKENNA LONG & ALDRIDGE LLP
Song K. Jung
1900 K Street, N.W.
Washington, DC 20006
EXAMINER
OSTERHOUT, BENJAMIN LEE
ART UNIT PAPER NUMBER
1711
MAIL DATE DELIVERY MODE
12/17/2012 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 PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
________________

Ex parte HAE DEOG JEONG,
Byung Hwan Ahn, Hung Myong Cho, Sang Woo Woo, and
Jong Chul Bang
________________

Appeal 2011-005317
Application 11/295,625
Technology Center 1700
________________

Before LINDA M. GAUDETTE, MARK NAGUMO, and
CHRISTOPHER L. CRUMBLEY, Administrative Patent Judges.

NAGUMO, Administrative Patent Judge.

DECISION ON APPEAL
Appeal 2011-005317
Application 11/295,625

2
A. Introduction1,
Hae Deog Jeong, Byung Hwan Ahn, Hung Myong Cho, Sang Woo
Woo, and Jong Chul Bang (“Jeong”) timely appeal under 35 U.S.C. § 134(a)
from the final rejection2 of claims 1, 9, 15, 26, and 27, which are all of the
pending claims. We have jurisdiction. 35 U.S.C. § 6. We REVERSE.
The subject matter on appeal relates to a sump assembly for a
dishwasher. The 625 Specification explains that dishwashers typically
comprise a tub fitted with one or more racks to load dishes, one or more
spray nozzles to spray washing water at the dishes, a sump assembly
mounted in the floor of the tub to collect and reserve the washing water, and
a washing pump to pump the washing water from the sump to the spray
nozzles. (Spec. 1 [0002].) The sump assembly is also fitted with a heater to
bring the water to a washing temperature, and with filters and a grinder for
food residues displaced from the dishes. (Id. at 1 [0003] through 2 [0005].)
The claimed sump assembly is said to provide a larger washing water
reserve volume, without increasing the overall size of the dishwasher, and to
provide effective washing water flow in the sump assembly while
minimizing the amount of foreign objects in the washing water introduced to
the spraying nozzle. (Id. at 3 [0010]-[0011].)

1 Application 11/295,625, Sump of Dish Washer, filed 7 December 2005,
claiming the benefit of an application filed in Korea on 7 December 2004.
The specification is referred to as the “625 Specification,” and is cited as
“Spec.” The real party in interest is listed as LG Electronics, Inc. (Appeal
Brief, filed 16 August 2010 (“Br.”), 3.)
2 Office action mailed 15 March 2010.
Appeal 2011-005317
Application 11/295,625

3
Representative Claim 1 reads:
A sump assembly of a dishwasher, comprising:
a sump case [190] for reserving washing water, the sump
case having
coupling bosses protruded upward;
a sump cover [130] seating on an upper portion of the
sump case [190], the sump cover having
a first coupling boss and a second coupling boss;
a self-cleaning filter assembly [120] mounted on a top
surface of the sump cover [130] to filter foreign objects,
the self-cleaning assembly having
a first coupling hole and a second coupling hole;
a fluid passage guide [140] thermal-bonded on a bottom of
the sump cover;
a pump lower [170] having a first coupling boss formed on
a frame portion and a second coupling boss formed
therein;
a washing pump [290] disposed between the fluid passage
guide [140] and the pump lower [170], for pumping out the
washing water reserved in the sump case [190] and guided
by the fluid passage guide [140];
a first coupling member inserted into the first coupling
boss of the pump lower through the first coupling hole of
the self-cleaning filter and the first coupling boss of the
sump cover; and
a second coupling member inserted into the coupling boss
of the sump case through the second coupling hole of the
self-cleaning filter, the second coupling boss of the sump
cover, and the second coupling boss of the sump lower;
wherein the first coupling member and the second
coupling member are inserted after the fluid passage guide
is mounted on the bottom of the sump cover.
(Claims App., Br. 17-18; indentation, paragraphing, emphasis, and bracketed
labels to Figure 4 (see following page) added.)
App
App

eal 2011-0
lication 11
{Figu
subasse
05317
/295,625
re 4 shows
mbly-labe
{Figure 4
an explod
ls and corr
4
is shown b
ed diagram
esponding
elow:}
of a sum
Figure nu

p assemb
mbers add
ly;
ed}
Appeal 2011-005317
Application 11/295,625

5
In embodiments covered by claim 1, the sump assembly comprises a
sump case 190,3 which is coupled to a “pump lower” 170, which contains a
washing pump 290. Washing pump 290 pumps washing water from the
sump case 190, and the pump washing water is “guided by the fluid passage
guide.” Sump case 190 is covered by sump cover 130. The underside
(“bottom”) of sump cover 130 is thermally bonded to fluid passage
guide 140. The top of sump cover [130] serves as a seat for self-cleaning
filter 120. Claim 9 depends from claim 1.
Although claim 15 is similar in many respects to claim 1, claim 15
does not require the presence of a washing pump, and hence recites no
limitations regarding the position of a washing pump relative to other
components of the dishwasher sump assembly. Moreover, claim 15 requires
fewer limitations of the fluid passage guide. In particular, claim 15 does not
require any particular function of the fluid passage guide. In this appeal, the
critical argued limitation of claim 15 is:
a fluid passage guide thermal-bonded on a bottom of the
sump cover [130], the fluid passage guide having at least
one coupling boss therein;
(Claims App., Br. 19; indentation, paragraphing, emphasis, and label to
Figure 4 added.) Claims 26 and 27 depend from claim 15.
Resolution of this appeal does not require inquiry into the identity of
the various coupling members, holes, bosses, and their locations.

3 For clarity, throughout this Opinion, labels to elements in Figures are
presented in bold font, regardless of their presentation in the original
document.
Appeal 2011-005317
Application 11/295,625

6
The Examiner maintains the following grounds of rejection:4
A. Claim 1 stands rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) in view of
Jozwiak.5
B. Claim 9 stands rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) in view of the
combined teachings of Jozwiak, Langlois,6 and Thies.7
C. Claims 15, 26, and 27 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a)
in view of the combined teachings of Thies, Jozwiak, and
Langlois.
B. Discussion
Findings of fact throughout this Opinion are supported by a
preponderance of the evidence of record.
Initially, we find that Jeong has presented arguments for the separate
patentability of independent claims 1 and 15 only. Accordingly, all claims
stand or fall with the respective independent claims.
37 C.F.R. § 41.37(c)(1)(vii) (2011).
The issue dispositive of this appeal is whether the Examiner erred
harmfully by combining features from two alternative embodiments
described by Jozwiak in order to demonstrate the argued obviousness of the
appealed claims. We need not discuss the other references.

4 Examiner’s Answer mailed 2 November 2010 (“Ans.”).
5 Todd M. Jozwiak et al., Pump and Soil Collection System for a
Dishwasher, U.S. Patent 6,182,674 B1 (2001).
6 Henry J. Langlois, Fluid Coupling Using Water, U.S. Patent 3,521,451
(1970).
7 Edward L. Thies, Dishwasher Pump having Soil Collection System, U.S.
Patent 5,848,601 (1998).
Appeal 2011-005317
Application 11/295,625

7
Jozwiak
According to Jozwiak, typical domestic dishwashers use two different
kinds of pumps to draw wash liquid from a sump and to spray the wash
liquid on dishes. (Jozwiak col. 1, ll. 16-18.) Removing the trapped soils
efficiently, with a minimal use of water and energy, has been a major
concern to the industry. (Id. at l. 18 to col. 2, l. 33.) One highly efficient
and widely used pump is the volute type pump, “wherein a centrifugal pump
is housed in a spiral casing so that rotational speed will be converted to
pressure without shock.” (Id. at ll. 34-40.) Another type of widely used
pump is a vertical axis pump, “where the flow of wash liquid is
perpendicular to the plane in which the pump impeller rotates.”
(Id. at ll. 40-43.) Although vertical axis pumps are less efficient than volute
type pumps, soil separation systems have been developed that make the
vertical axis pump systems “operate in a highly efficient and effective
manner.” (Id. at ll. 46-50.) Jozwiak describes similar solutions, in both
volute- and vertical axis pump-systems, for “removing soils from dishware
and sending the removed soils to drain in an effective and highly efficient
manner.” (Id. at ll. 57-59.)
Jozwiak—first embodiment
In a first embodiment, illustrated in Fig. 2, shown on the next page,
soil separator and pump assembly 20 comprises a vertical axis “wash
pump 28 having a wash impeller 32 disposed within a pump chamber 30
defined by a pump housing 31.” (Jozwiak col. 5, ll. 5-8.) The impeller 32,
driven by motor 34, draws wash liquid from sump 18 through pump inlet 36
App
App

and p
and 4
{Fi

coar
Jozw
and f
draw
food
eal 2011-0
lication 11
umps was
2, to clea
g. 2: sump
Wash liq
se particle
iak Fig. 4
ood partic
n into pum
particles a
05317
/295,625
h water th
n the dishe
{Joz
assembly
uid contai
grate 24 (
, which is
les encoun
p chambe
re centrifu
rough mai
s. (Id. at c
wiak Figu
with impe
ning food
id. at col. 4
reproduced
ter chopp
r 30. (Id.
gally sepa
8
n pump ou
ol. 5, ll. 5
re 2 is sho
ller driven
particles i
, ll. 61-64
on the fo
ing region
at col. 5, l
rated from
tlet 38 to
-17.)
wn below
by vertica
s collected
) shown at
llowing pa
68 (center
l. 49-52.)
the wash
spray arm
}
lly oriente
in sump 1
top right
ge. The w
of Fig. 4)
The comm
liquid by
s 32

d motor }
8 via
and left of
ash liquid
and are
inuted
action of

App
App

impe
right
{Fig
Soil
of Fi
leads
and
to su
rema
col.
eal 2011-0
lication 11
ller 32 thr
of Fig. 4)
ure 4: cro
collector 4
g. 4), whic
to soil ac
62-63.) W
mp 18, lea
ining was
6, l. 2.)
05317
/295,625
ough annu
. (Id. at ll.
{Joz
ss section
5 compris
h has a to
cumulator
ash liquid
ving the s
h liquid se
lar guide c
52-57.)
wiak Figu
of a sump
es annular
p wall form
50 (upper
passes up
oils in sep
ttle into so
9
hamber 4
re 4 is sho
with verti
soil separ
ed from f
left of Fig
wardly thr
aration cha
il accumu
4 into soil
wn below
cally orien
ation chan
ilter scree
. 4). (Id. a
ough filter
nnel 46, w
lator 50. (
collector 4
}
ted pump
nel 46 (up
n 48, and
t ll. 56-58
screen 48
here the s
Id. at col.
5 (upper
assembly}
per right
which

and back
oils in the
5, l. 63 to

App
App

with
Mor
plate
relat
chan
Figu
{Fig
eal 2011-0
lication 11
In the se
an impelle
eover, the
into a stre
ively free
nels direct
re 10, whi
ure 10: sum
05317
/295,625
Jo
cond embo
r, Jozwiak
wash liqui
am laden
of food pa
ly from th
ch is repro
p with ho
zwiak—se
diment, in
uses a ho
d coming
with comm
rticles. Th
e pump. T
duced belo
rizontally
10
cond emb
stead of u
rizontally
off of the i
inuted fo
e two stre
he second
w.
oriented v
odiment
sing a ver
oriented v
mpeller is
od particle
ams are di
embodim
olute pum
tically orie
olute pum
separated
s and a str
rected to s
ent is show
p 228 asse
nted pump
p.
by a filter
eam
eparate
n in

mbly}

App
App

pum
lowe
col.
after
comm
into
{F

8 Vo
rotat
spira
with
eal 2011-0
lication 11
Jozwiak
p inlet 236
r left) and
10, ll. 56-6
being dra
inuted by
pump cham
ig. 11: a d

lute pump
ed about a
l casing su
in the pum
05317
/295,625
teaches th
of the hor
directed th
0.) As sh
wn into pu
chopper
ber 232.
etailed vie

228 is “a
horizonta
ch that sp
p chambe
at wash liq
izontally o
rough ma
own in mo
mp inlet 2
assembly 2
(Id. at col
{Fig. 11 i
w of an v

centrifug
l axis with
eed will be
r.” (Jozwi
11
uid is dra
riented vo
in outlet 2
re detail in
36, food p
50 (Fig. 1
. 10, ll. 10
s shown b
olute pump
al pump ha
in a pump
converte
ak col. 10,
wn in from
lute pump
38 to the s
Figure 1
articles in
1, lower l
-18.)
elow}
and soil
ving a wa
chamber 2
d to pressu
ll. 52-56.
sump 21
assembly
pray arm.
1, reprodu
the wash l
eft), and th
separation
sh impelle
32 which
re withou
)
8 through
8 (Fig. 10,
(Jozwiak
ced below
iquid are
en drawn
system}
r 230
defines a
t shock

,
Appeal 2011-005317
Application 11/295,625

12
In pump chamber 232, the wash liquid containing comminuted food particles
is moved outwardly from the center of impeller 230 by blades 230b. (Id. at
col. 10, ll. 28-31.) The wash water is separated from the comminuted food
particles by filter plate 260 such that a first portion of wash water that is free
of food particles passes into first region 262, on the right side of pump
chamber 230, and then through main outlet 238 (Fig. 11, right of center) to
the spray arms in the washing chamber. (Id. at ll. 32-38.) Wash liquid
containing food particles is directed into second region 264 of pump
chamber 230, to the left of first region 262, and then to secondary outlet 240
(left of center in Fig. 11) and into the soil collector 270 (upper left of
Fig. 11) via inlet 276. (Id. at col. 11, ll. 22-23.) The top panel 274 of soil
collector 270 forms a top wall with a solid portion over the inlet 276.
A separation channel 280 is formed between the main body 272 and
openings 282 in top panel 274 that are provided with flat screen panels 284.
(Id. at ll. 13-21.) Wash water containing comminuted food particles enters
separation channel 280, water passes upwardly through screen panels 284,
and the particles settle to the soil accumulation sump 280 through
downwardly projection portion 286 of main body 272. (Id. at ll. 37-42.)
the Examiner’s findings of fact: rejection of claim 1
The Examiner (Ans. 4) finds that the second embodiment provides a
sump case 216 (Jozwiak Fig. 10, part 216; Fig. 11, part 225)9, a sump
cover 270 and 272 (id.), a self-cleaning filter assembly 284 (Fig. 11), and a
fluid passage guide 286 (Fig. 10, above and left of center). The Examiner

9 The Examiner refers primarily to Figs. 12 and 11, but for brevity, we refer
only to Figs. 10 and 11.)
Appeal 2011-005317
Application 11/295,625

13
finds that this embodiment of Jozwiak “teaches a washing pump assembly”
[pump 234, volute member 227 [see Fig. 12, not reproduced here],
impeller 230, and pump inlet 236], “but may not teach a pump lower with
two coupling bosses, and a washing pump disposed between the pump lower
and a fluid passage guide.” (Ans. 5, ll. 1-3.)
The Examiner finds that the first embodiment [shown in Figs. 2-4]
teaches a dishwasher having a pump lower (center of Fig. 4, pump base 33)
and “a washing pump (volute pump, Fig. 10, part 228) disposed between the
pump lower and a fluid passage guide (soil collector, Fig. 4, part 45).”
(Ans. 5, ll. 4-10.)10
The Examiner reasons that:
“[b]ecause both embodiments of Jozwiak et al. teach sump
assemblies of dishwashers it would have been obvious . . . to
substitute the washing pump assembly of the first
embodiment of Jozwiak et al. with the pump lower with two
coupling bosses and washing pump assembly of the second
embodiment of Jozwiak et al. in order to achieve the
predictable result of pumping washing water through a sump
assembly and washing dishes.
(Ans. 5, 2d full para.)
Jeong argues that the proposed modification is improper. (Br. 11.)
In Jeong’s view, rather than being a mere substitution of parts, replacing the
volute pump 228 of the second embodiment between the base 33 and soil
collector 45 of the first embodiment would require substantial redesign of

10 We are puzzled by this finding, which appears to treat two distinct
embodiments as one—a distinction that the Examiner appears to recognize
in the immediately following analysis.
Appeal 2011-005317
Application 11/295,625

14
the first embodiment. (Id. at para. bridging 11-12.) As Jeong points out,
Jozwiak Figure 4 shows that “the space between the base 33 and the soil
collector 45 is filled with many other parts.” (Id. at 12, ll. 8-10.) The
required modifications would include relocation, elimination, or
modification of many of those parts. The Examiner, however, has not
explained what modifications would have been necessary or why they would
have been suggested or obvious to the artisan.
Jozwiak does teach similar soil collection systems for the vertical axis
pump system of the first embodiment and the horizontal axis volute pump
system of the second embodiment. The Examiner has not, however, directed
our attention to any credible evidence that Jozwiak teaches or suggests
incorporating features of the volute pump system into the vertical axis
system in the manner suggested by the Examiner.
The Examiner’s response, that the rejection is based on the
“substitution of known, equivalent element for another in order to obtain
predictable results” (Ans. 13, last para.), lacks a credible evidentiary
foundation due to the errors in the Examiner’s findings of fact.
The Examiner does not rely on the other references in any way that
cures the deficiencies of the combination of features from the two alternative
embodiments described by Jozwiak. Accordingly, we REVERSE the
rejection of claim 1.
rejection of claim 15
In a similar way, the Examiner finds that Thies does not teach a self-
cleaning filter assembly, sump cover, fluid passage guide assembly,
Appeal 2011-005317
Application 11/295,625

15
thermally bonded to a sump cover, a pump lower in which the fluid passage
guide seats, and a sump case on which the pump lower seats. (Ans. 8, 1st
para.)
The Examiner finds that Jozwiak teaches a sump assembly having a
sump cover 272 on which is seated self-cleaning filter assembly 284.
(Id. at 2d para.) Although the Examiner finds that this second embodiment
described by Jozwiak includes fluid passage guide 286, positioned below
and connected to the sump cover 272 (id. at 9, ll. 4-6), the Examiner appears
to recognize that part 286 does not have at least one coupling boss, as
required by claim 15.11 To remedy this lack, the Examiner appears to turn to
the first embodiment described by Jozwiak, in which the Examiner finds
pump base part 33 (Jozwiak Fig. 4, supra) to be a “pump lower . . . on which
the fluid passage guide (pump housing, Fig. 4, part 31) seats having a soil
chamber (soil accumulator, Fig. 4, part 50) and a first and second coupling
boss.” (Ans., sentence bridging 8-9.)
The Examiner concludes, without further analysis or explanation, that
it would have been obvious “to modify the sump assembly of Thies with the
teachings of Jozwiak et al. in order to have a self-cleaning filter assembly,
sump cover to protect the sump pump, a pump lower having a soil chamber
to accumulate foreign objects, and a sump case to seat a pump lower.”
(Ans. 9, 1st full para.)

11 Jozwiak describes part 286 as a “downwardly projection portion” of main
body 272, “which defines a soil accumulation region or sum 288 for the soil
collector 270.” (Jozwiak col. 11, ll. 35-37.) We note that Jeong does not
dispute that part 286 functions as a “fluid guide passage” as recited in
claim 15.
Appeal 2011-005317
Application 11/295,625

16
Jeong argues that the Examiner’s apparent treatment of projection
portion 286 of soil collector 270 as being interchangeable with pump
housing 31 is incorrect. (Br. 14, 2d para.)
The weight of the evidence of record supports Jeong’s argument. The
Examiner has not directed our attention to any credible evidence that the
projection portion 286 has any structural or functional correspondance to
pump housing 31 such that, even if both might be called “fluid passage
guides,” there would have been a suggestion or motivation to substitute one
for the other.
As with the rejection of claim 1, the Examiner’s response, that the
rejection is based on the “substitution of known, equivalent element for
another in order to obtain predictable results” (Ans. 16, ll. 4-6), lacks a
credible evidentiary foundation due to the errors in the Examiner’s findings
of fact.
The Examiner does not rely on the other references in any way that
cures the deficiencies of the combination of features from the two alternative
embodiments described by Jozwiak. Accordingly, we REVERSE the
rejection of claim 15.
C. Order
We REVERSE the rejection of claim 1 under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) in
view of Jozwiak.
We REVERSE the rejection of claim 9 under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) in
view of the combined teachings of Jozwiak, Langlois, and Thies.
Appeal 2011-005317
Application 11/295,625

17
We REVERSE the rejection of claims 15, 26, and 27 under
35 U.S.C. § 103(a) in view of the combined teachings of Thies, Jozwiak, and
Langlois.
REVERSED

sld