Ex Parte Miglioranza

Patent Trial and Appeal Board

Aug 31, 2016

11772735 (P.T.A.B. Aug. 31, 2016)

UNITED STA TES p A TENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
APPLICATION NO. FILING DATE
111772,735 0710212007
3624 7590 09/02/2016
VOLPE AND KOENIG, P,C
UNITED PLAZA
30 SOUTH 17TH STREET, 18th Floor
PHILADELPHIA, PA 19103
FIRST NAMED INVENTOR
Federico MIGLIORANZA
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.
CAM3-PT156 1054
EXAMINER
HERNANDEZ, MANUEL J
ART UNIT PAPER NUMBER
2859
NOTIFICATION DATE DELIVERY MODE
09/02/2016 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):
eoffice@volpe-koenig.com
PTOL-90A (Rev. 04/07)
UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
Ex parte FEDERICO MIGLIORANZA
Appeal2014-009424
Application 11/772,735
Technology Center 2800
Before CARL W. WHITEHEAD JR, BRUCE R. WINSOR, and
MELISSA A. RAAP ALA, Administrative Patent Judges.
WHITEHEAD JR., Administrative Patent Judge.
DECISION ON APPEAL
STATEMENT OF THE CASE
Appellant is appealing the Final Rejection of claims 1, 3, 4, 8-10, 25-
31, 37-39, 43, 44, 55, 56, 58, 79, and 80 under 35 U.S.C. § 134(a). 1 Appeal
Brief5. We have jurisdiction under 35 U.S.C. § 6(b) (2012).
We reverse.
1 An oral hearing was held on August 16, 2016.
Appeal2014-009424
Application 11/772,735
Introduction
"The present invention relates to a method and system for temperature
controlled supplying electrical energy from a battery power supply unit to an
electronic device, in particular to an electronic device mounted on a
bicycle." Specification [3].
Representative Claim (disputed limitations emphasized)
1. Method for controlling battery temperature in an electrical
energy power supply unit for powering a bicycle electronic
device, comprising the steps of:
providing a power supply unit that has at least one battery
with a maximum nominal capacity, and a predetermined lower
temperature threshold that is selected to ensure a minimum
nominal capacity of the power supply unit is no less than 5% of
the maximum nominal capacity;
providing at least one battery temperature sensor
associated with the at least one battery;
providing at least one heating element thermally coupled
with the at least one battery;
detecting through said at least one battery temperature
sensor a temperature associated with the at least one battery;
checking operative conditions of the power supply unit,
including checking whether the detected temperature associated
with the at least one battery is less than or equal to the
predetermined lower temperature threshold;
and, if the checking step has a positive outcome, electrical
energy from the power supply unit is supplied to said at least one
2
Appeal2014-009424
Application 11/772,735
heating element provided that a remaining minimum nominal
capacity of the power supply unit is at least 5% of the maximum
nominal capacity of the power supply unit.
Rejections on Appeal
Claims 1, 3, 4, 8-10, 25-27, 56, 79, and 80 stand rejected under 35
U.S.C. §103(a) as being unpatentable over McMahan (US Patent Number
6,002,240; issued December 14, 1999), Terada (US Patent Number
6,456,041 B 1; issued September 24, 2002), and Park (US Patent Number
6,624,615 Bl; issued September 23, 2003). Final Rejection 2-14.
Claim 28 stands rejected under 35 U.S.C. §103(a) as being
unpatentable over McMahan, Terada, Park, and Miller (US Patent Number
6,271,648 Bl; issued August 7, 2001). Final Rejection 14.
Claims 29, 37, 39, and 55 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. §103(a) as
being unpatentable over McMahan and Park. Final Rejection 14--16.
Claims 30, 31, 38, and 44 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. §103(a) as
being unpatentable over McMahan, Park, and Terada. Final Rejection 16-
17.
Claim 43 stands rejected under 35 U.S.C. §103(a) as being
unpatentable over McMahan, Park, and Endress (US Patent Number
2,516,048; issued July 18, 1950). Final Rejection 17.
Claim 58 stands rejected under 35 U.S.C. §103(a) as being
unpatentable over McMahan, Terada, Park, and Arai (US Patent Number
6,275,008 Bl; issued August 14, 2001). Final Rejection 18.
3
Appeal2014-009424
Application 11/772,735
ANALYSIS
Rather than reiterate the arguments of Appellant and the Examiner,
we refer to the Appeal Brief (filed April 17, 2014), the Reply Brief (filed
September 3, 2014), the Answer (mailed July 3, 2014) and the Final
Rejection (mailed July 17, 2013) for the respective details.
Appellant argues, "All of the pending independent claims recite the
limitation that the battery is permitted to self-heated [sic] only when or so
long as the battery has a remaining charge that is at least 5°/o of its
maximum nominal capacity." Appeal Brief 21.
The Examiner finds the combination of McMahan and Terada fails to
disclose the predetermined lower threshold and concludes:
However, McMahan discloses a predetermined lower
temperature threshold, wherein if the predetermined lower
temperature threshold is reached, the battery is heated to
maintain the battery in a safe operating zone. In other words,
McMahan is inherently trying to maintain at least some degree
or percentage of operability of the power supply unit, i.e. the
battery.
Final Rejection 4.
The Examiner further finds that "Park discloses the capacity of a
battery is maximum at a specific temperature." Final Rejection 4.
Appellant argues the Examiner's reliance upon Mc Mahan and Park to
disclose "this feature" is erroneous because McMahan "only teach heating a
battery" and "Park is directed to maximizing the relationship between
battery temperature and charging time; Park is completely silent regarding
heating a battery only if a certain capacity of the battery is available."
Appeal Brief 21-22. Appellant argues, "Rather than recognizing a
percentage relationship, McMahan explicitly teaches heating the battery
4
Appeal2014-009424
Application 11/772,735
until the battery is completely discharged. (See McMahan, col. 7, lines 9-
11 )."Appeal Brief 25-26.
We find Appellant's arguments persuasive. Accordingly, we reverse
the Examiner's obviousness rejections of independent claims 1, 29, 56, 79,
and 80, as well as dependent claims 3, 4, 8-10, 25-28, 30, 31, 37-39, 43, 44,
55, and 58.
DECISION
The Examiner's obviousness rejections of claims 1, 3, 4, 8-10, 25-31,
37-39, 43, 44, 55, 56, 58, 79, and 80 are reversed.
REVERSED
5