Ex Parte Mueller et al

Board of Patent Appeals and Interferences

Jan 26, 2009

09977775 (B.P.A.I. Jan. 26, 2009)

UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
____________

BEFORE THE BOARD OF PATENT APPEALS
AND INTERFERENCES
____________

Ex parte DIANNE D. MUELLER, RALPH TATE JR., BRENT A. JUNGE,
JOSEPH L. COLEMAN, JAN M. WATSON, and STEVEN R. CAWLEY
____________

Appeal 2008-2706
Application 09/977,775
Technology Center 3700
____________

Decided: January 26, 2009
____________

Before: JENNIFER D. BAHR, LINDA E. HORNER, and
STEVEN D.A. McCARTHY, Administrative Patent Judges.

BAHR, Administrative Patent Judge.

DECISION ON APPEAL
STATEMENT OF THE CASE
Dianne D. Mueller et al. (Appellants) originally appealed under
35 U.S.C. § 134 from the Examiner’s decision rejecting claims 1-11 and
14-20. On page 3 of the Answer, the Examiner withdrew the rejections of
claims 5-11, 14, 15, 19, and 20. Accordingly, this appeal involves only
Appeal 2008-2706
Application 09/977,775

2
claims 1-4 and 16-18. The Examiner indicated on page 2 of the Answer that
claims 5-15 and 19-26, the only other claims pending in the application, are
objected to as depending from a rejected base claim, but are otherwise
allowable. We have jurisdiction over this appeal under 35 U.S.C. § 6
(2002).
The Invention
Appellants’ claimed invention is directed to “an oven in combination
with a refrigeration unit for cooling the cooking chamber to permit the
refrigerated storage of food within the cooking chamber until it is desired to
begin the cooking of the food.” Specification, para. 1.
Claim 1, reproduced below with italics added to highlight the
limitation at issue in this appeal, is the only independent claim involved in
this appeal.
1. A combination appliance for cooling and
cooking a food item, comprising:
a frame comprising a cooking chamber and
a refrigeration module chamber, and the cooking
chamber having a first access opening through
which access to the interior of the cooking
chamber is provided;
a door moveably mounted to the frame for
movement between an open position where the
first access opening is uncovered and a closed
position where the first access opening is covered;
a heat element disposed within the cooking
chamber to selectively provide heat to the cooking
chamber;
an inlet duct extending between the
refrigeration module chamber and the cooking
chamber, the inlet duct having an inlet in
communication with the refrigeration module
Appeal 2008-2706
Application 09/977,775

3
chamber and an outlet in communication with the
cooking chamber;
a return duct extending between the
refrigeration module chamber and the cooking
chamber, the return duct having an inlet in
communication with the cooking chamber and an
outlet in communication with the refrigeration
module chamber;
a refrigeration module comprising a
compressor, condenser, evaporator, and base on
which the compressor, condenser, and evaporator
are mounted to form a module, and an insulated
housing overlying the evaporator to thermally
isolate the evaporator from the condenser, the
insulated housing having an inlet and an outlet,
which align with the outlet of the return duct and
the inlet of the inlet duct, respectively, when the
refrigeration module is mounted within the
refrigeration module chamber, to thereby form a
refrigerated air path between the evaporator and
the cooking chamber.

The Rejection
Appellants seek review of the Examiner’s rejection of claims 1-4 and
16-18 under 35 U.S.C. § 102(e) as being anticipated by Clark (US 6,497,276
B2, issued December 24, 2002).

SUMMARY OF DECISION
We REVERSE.
Appeal 2008-2706
Application 09/977,775

4

OPINION
To establish anticipation, every element and limitation of the claimed
invention must be found in a single prior art reference, arranged as in the
claim. Karsten Mfg. Corp. v. Cleveland Golf Co., 242 F.3d 1376, 1383
(Fed. Cir. 2001).
Appellants point out that Clark's condenser 90 is mounted not in the
drawer 68 along with the evaporator 78 and compressor 76, but to the
exterior of the back wall 26 of the refrigerator-oven. Reply Br. 4. Thus,
according to Appellants, Clark does not anticipate the subject matter of
claim 1 because Clarke’s combination refrigerator-oven lacks “a
refrigeration module comprising a compressor, condenser, evaporator, and
base on which the compressor, condenser, and evaporator are mounted to
form a module,” as called for in the claim. Reply Brief 4 and 6.
The Examiner contends that claim 1 does not require that the
compressor, the condenser, and the evaporator all be directly mounted to a
single base. Answer 4. According to the Examiner, claim 1 merely requires
that the condenser, evaporator, and compressor be “at least indirectly
connected or mounted to the same base.” Answer 5. The Examiner finds
that Clark satisfies this requirement because Clark’s “condenser 90 and the
evaporator 78 are connected to and mounted to the compressor 76 (and thus
also to its base) via interconnecting pipes as shown in Figure 3 of Clark.”
Id.
In light of the stated positions of Appellants and the Examiner, the
dispositive issue before us is whether Appellants have demonstrated the
Examiner erred in finding that Clark discloses “a refrigeration module
Appeal 2008-2706
Application 09/977,775

5
comprising a compressor, condenser, evaporator, and base on which the
compressor, condenser, and evaporator are mounted to form a module,” as
called for in claim 1. Based on the facts enumerated below, which are
supported by a preponderance of the evidence, we find that Clark does not
satisfy the claim limitation in question and thus does not anticipate the
subject matter of claim 1 or claims 2-4 and 16-18 depending from claim 1.
Appellants’ Specification discloses a modular refrigeration unit 20
comprising a base 120 on which are mounted, inter alia, a compressor 122,
condenser assembly 124, and an evaporator assembly 126. Specification,
para. 57; Figure 6. According to Appellants’ Specification, “[s]ince all of
the components for the modular refrigeration unit 20 are mounted on the
base 120, the modular refrigeration unit 20 is easily slid into and out of the
refrigeration unit chamber 16 to simplify the installation and maintenance of
the modular refrigeration unit 20.” Id.
Consistent with the disclosure in Appellants’ Specification and
drawings, we construe the term “mounted” as used in claim 1 in accordance
with its ordinary and customary meaning as placed, fixed, or fastened on a
support or backing. Webster's New World Dictionary 930 (David B.
Guralnik ed., 2nd Coll. Ed., Simon & Schuster, Inc. 1984).
Clark discloses locating the compressor 76 and evaporator 78 in a
drawer 68 slidably mounted below enclosed cooking chamber 28. Clark,
col. 3, ll. 54-57 and col. 4, ll. 10-11; Clark, Figure 2. Clark discloses
condenser 90 of refrigeration unit 70 mounted on an outer surface 92 of the
back one of the vertical side walls 26. Clark, col. 4, ll. 29-33; Clark, Figure
3. Clark’s condenser 90 is connected fluidically to the evaporator and
compressor (col. 4, ll. 37-40 and 44-45). While Clark’s condenser 90 is
Appeal 2008-2706
Application 09/977,775

6
connected via fluid lines to the compressor 76 and evaporator 78, the
condenser is not affixed, fastened or “mounted” to either of these
components or to the drawer 68 or any other base or support on which the
compressor 76 or evaporator 78 is mounted. Rather, Clark explicitly
discloses that the condenser 90 is mounted to the back wall of the
refrigerator-oven.
In light of the above, Clark does not disclose a base on which all of
the compressor, condenser, and evaporator are mounted to form a module, as
required in claim 1.

CONCLUSION OF LAW
Appellants have demonstrated the Examiner erred in finding that
Clark discloses “a refrigeration module comprising a compressor, condenser,
evaporator, and base on which the compressor, condenser, and evaporator
are mounted to form a module,” as called for in claim 1. We cannot sustain
the rejection of claim 1 or claims 2-4 and 16-18, which depend from claim 1,
as being anticipated by Clark.

DECISION
The Examiner’s decision is:
REVERSED

vsh

Appeal 2008-2706
Application 09/977,775

7
WHIRLPOOL PATENTS COMPANY - MD 0750
500 RENAISSANCE DRIVE - SUITE 102
ST. JOSEPH, MI 49085