Ex Parte Love et al

Patent Trial and Appeal Board

Jul 21, 2017

12850180 (P.T.A.B. Jul. 21, 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.
6472 9294
EXAMINER
PENCE, JETHRO M
ART UNIT PAPER NUMBER
1717
MAIL DATE DELIVERY MODE
12/850,180 08/04/2010
25280 7590
Legal Department (M-495)
P.O. Box 1926
Spartanburg, SC 29304
Franklin S. Love III
07/21/2017 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 FRANKLIN S. LOVE III, JOSEPH E. RUMLER,
MARK A. HORNUNG, JAMES C. BRYANT, and
SHARON E. KOH-FALLET
Appeal 2016-003936
Application 12/850,180
Technology Center 1700
Before CATHERINE Q. TIMM, JEFFREY R. SNAY, and
BRIAN D. RANGE, Administrative Patent Judges.
SNAY, Administrative Patent Judge.
DECISION ON APPEAL1
Appellants2 appeal under 35 U.S.C. § 134(a) from the Examiner’s
decision rejecting claims 15—24. We have jurisdiction under 35 U.S.C.
§ 6(b).
We affirm.
1 We cite to the Specification (“Spec.”) filed August 4, 2010, as amended
November 16, 2012; Final Office Action (“Final Act.”) dated November 28,
2014; Appellants’ Appeal Brief (“Br.”) dated May 3, 2015; and Examiner’s
Answer (“Ans.”) dated October 2, 1015.
2 Appellants identify Milliken & Company as the real party in interest.
Br. 2.
Appeal 2016-003936
Application 12/850,180
BACKGROUND
The subject matter on appeal relates to an apparatus for directing
liquid streams toward a substrate, and selectively interrupting and
redirecting stream flow by application of gaseous fluid impingement jets
transverse to the normal flow direction. Spec. 11. Claim 15 is reproduced
from the Claims Appendix to the Appeal Brief as follows, with italics added
to highlight the recitation in dispute:
15. An apparatus for intermittently applying a liquid from a
pressurized source (90) onto a target substrate (20) in the form
of liquid streams, the apparatus comprising:
a manifold chamber (111) for receiving the liquid from
the pressurized source;
a plurality of liquid channels (112) in fluid
communication with the manifold chamber, each liquid channel
having a central channel axis and liquid discharge end
projecting towards the target substrate (20) whereby the liquid
from the manifold chamber passes through the liquid channels
creating the liquid streams directed toward the substrate;
a plurality of impingement jet directional passages (211),
each impingement jet directional passage being associated with
a corresponding liquid channel, each impingement jet
directional passage further having:
an impingement jet discharge opening disposed at
a location between the liquid discharge end of the
associated liquid channel and the target substrate, and
a central impingement jet axis oriented in an
intersecting relation to the central channel axis of the
corresponding liquid channel whereby an impingement
stream (19) passing through the impingement jet tube
(230) towards the liquid stream (11) will create a diverted
flow path in the associated liquid stream; and
a liquid collection module (300) having an entrance for
receiving the diverted flow path of the liquid stream, a funnel
section (314) in fluid communication with the entrance and
2
Appeal 2016-003936
Application 12/850,180
having a cross section that reduces in size as the funnel section
progresses away from the entrance, and an exit (315) allowing
fluid progressing through the funnel section to exit the
collection module, wherein the liquid collection module further
includes a leading edge (331) positioned on the lower side of
the entrance adjacent to the undisrupted flow path of the liquid
stream, wherein the leading edge is spaced about 0,127 mm to
about 0,381 mm (about 5 to about 15 mils) from the boundary
of the normal flow path of the liquid stream.
Claim 18 also is written in independent form, and includes the same
feature shown above in italics. Each of the remaining claims depends from
claim 15 or 18.
REJECTION
The Examiner maintains the following ground of rejection:3
Claims 15—24 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as
unpatentable over Love.4
OPINION
Appellants argue the claims as a group, focusing solely on language
that appears identically in the independent claims. See Br. 4—9. We limit
our discussion to representative independent claim 15.
After having considered the evidence presented in this Appeal and
each of Appellants’ contentions, we are not persuaded that Appellants
identify reversible error. We sustain the Examiner’s § 103(a) rejection for
the reasons expressed in the Final Action, the Answer, and below.
3 Final Act. 2—18; Ans. 4—20.
4 US 5,033,143, issued July 23, 1991 (“Love”).
3
Appeal 2016-003936
Application 12/850,180
As is relevant to Appellants’ argument on appeal, the Examiner found
that Love discloses an apparatus for intermittently applying a liquid to a
substrate that includes a plurality of liquid channels 166 and a corresponding
plurality of impingement jet direction passages 170. Final Act. 2—3
(referencing Love Fig. 3). We reproduce Figure 3 of Love below.
FIG. ~3~
Figure 3 depicts an apparatus in which transverse streams of a control
fluid are energized to interrupt fluid streams confined in channels or
grooves. Love col. 2,11. 41—50. In use, a working fluid is delivered from
cavity 162 through channels 166 to a target, such as a textile substrate. Id.
col. 3,1. 44—col. 4,1. 5. Each channel 166 includes first and second enclosed
passages separated by a discharge cavity 182. Id. col. 3,11. 44-A9; col. 3,1.
66—col. 4,1. 5. Control fluid selectively delivered through control tube 170
diverts fluid emerging from the first enclosed passage in channel 166 to
discharge cavity 182. Id. col. 4,11. 22—27; Fig. 3. The Examiner finds that a
4
Appeal 2016-003936
Application 12/850,180
discharge opening of each control tube 170 is located between a discharge
end of the first enclosed passage 166 and the target substrate. Final Act. 3, 7
(providing an annotated copy of Love’s Fig. 3).
Appellants argue that because Love delivers impingement fluid
vertically onto a horizontally-flowing working fluid, Love’s impingement
fluid discharge opening is not located between the working fluid discharge
end and the target substrate. Br. 5—7. We disagree. Appellants do not
dispute the Examiner’s finding that Love provides a working fluid discharge
opening at the point at which the first enclosed passage 166 meets discharge
cavity 182. Love’s Figure 2 shows impingement tube 170 being positioned
between that discharge opening and the target substrate 25.
Appellants further argue that “the present invention describes a
horizontal orientation of air flow and a vertical orientation of liquid stream,”
and that reversing the relative orientation of Love’s impingement and
working fluid streams would render Love’s apparatus inoperable and
unsatisfactory for its intended purpose. Br. 9. This argument is not
persuasive at least for the reason that the instant claims on appeal do not
require any particular orientation of either the liquid channels or the
impingement jet passages.
For the foregoing reasons, Appellants do not persuade us of reversible
error. The Examiner’s Rejection is sustained.
5
Appeal 2016-003936
Application 12/850,180
DECISION/ORDER
The Examiner’s rejection of claims 15—24 under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) is
affirmed.
No time period for taking any subsequent action in connection with
this appeal may be extended under 37 C.F.R. § 1.136(a).
AFFIRMED
6