Ex Parte Preble

Patent Trial and Appeal Board

Sep 25, 2013

11180337 (P.T.A.B. Sep. 25, 2013)

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.
11/180,337 07/14/2005 Duane Preble X-9506 3524
615 7590 09/25/2013
JOHN S. HALE
GIPPLE & HALE
6665-A OLD DOMINION DRIVE
MCLEAN, VA 22101
EXAMINER
DUONG, DIEU HIEN
ART UNIT PAPER NUMBER
2821
MAIL DATE DELIVERY MODE
09/25/2013 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
____________________

PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
____________________

Ex parte Microcom Design, Inc.
(Inventor: Duane Preble)
____________________

Appeal 2011-006832
Application 11/180,337
Technology Center 2821
____________________

Before RICHARD E. SCHAFER, RICHARD TORCZON and
JOHN G. NEW, Administrative Patent Judges.

SCHAFER, Administrative Patent Judge.
DECISION ON APPEAL
Appeal 2011-006832
Application 11/180,337

2

Microcom Design, Inc. (Applicant) appeals an Examiner’s decision rejecting
Claims 1-7. 35 U.S.C. §§ 6(b) and 134(a). We affirm.
Claimed Subject Matter
Applicant’s invention is directed to an antenna for sending and receiving
electrical signals. The antenna is made of a conductive material in the shape of
tapered coil. The narrow end of the coil is connected to a means for transmitting or
receiving radio signals. Claim 1 is representative:
An antenna for transmitting or receiving energy comprising
primarily of:
a coil of electrically conductive material formed into a
spiral shape, having a top end and a bottom end;
said top end being wider than said bottom end;
said bottom end of the spiral coil, being connected to a
means for transmitting or receiving radio frequency energy.
Brief 8 (Claims Appendix).
Rejections
The Examiner maintained the following rejections in the Answer:
1. Claim 1 under 35 U.S.C. § 102(b) as anticipated by Hall;1
2. Dependent Claims 2-5 and 7 under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) over the
combined teachings of Hall and Sydor;2 and
3. Dependent Claim 6 under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) over the combined
teachings of Hall and Macqueen.3

1 U.S. Patent 5,216,436 issued June 1, 1993.
2 U.S. Patent 5,479,182 issued Dec. 26, 1995.
3 U.S. Patent Application Publication 2004/0246185 A1 published Dec. 9, 2004.
Appeal 2011-006832
Application 11/180,337

3

Analysis
As an initial matter, we observe that Applicant does not present separate
arguments specifically directed to the dependent claims thus electing to have those
claims stand or fall with the decision on claim 1. We therefore limit our discussion
to that claim and the Hall reference.
The Examiner, referring to Hall’s Figure 1
(reproduced right), finds that Hall describes and
Figure 1 shows an antenna having an electrically
conductive material formed into a spiral shape or
helix having top and bottom ends. The Examiner
further found that the top end of Hall’s antenna is
wider than the bottom end. Lastly, the Examiner
found that the antenna is connected via connector
13 to a means for transmitting and receiving radio
signals. Answer 3.
Applicant argues that the while Hall teaches an antenna structure that
includes a spiral coil having a top end wider than the bottom end, the coil only acts
as a support structure. Brief 5. According to Applicant only the topmost coil 14 is
the antenna and “at no point does Hall suggest that the helix, in and of itself,
functions as an antenna.” Id. at 5-6.
The Examiner responds that the helix disclosed by Hall is described as part
of the antenna. The Examiner refers (Answer 6) to the following teachings from
Hall for support:
As described above and as diagrammatically shown in FIG. 1,
the antenna structure of the present invention comprises an
electrically short, ‘fat’ compressible tapered helix or
‘bedspring’-configured conductor 10. . . .
Appeal 2011-006832
Application 11/180,337

4

As shown in FIG. 1, the tapered helix or bedspring shape
of the antenna 10 is such that the topmost portion 14 of the
helix is the largest diameter portion of the helix and the
lowermost or base 12 of the ‘bedspring’ is the smallest diameter
portion of the helix.
Hall 3:57-61 and 4:5-9 (emphasis added).
We agree with the Examiner’s findings. As the above-quoted portions from
Hall show, the reference describes that the tapered helix is part of the antenna
structure. Even assuming that the top coil 14 may be the only “active” portion of
the Hall’s antenna, Hall nonetheless expressly teaches that the tapered helix
structure as well as the coil 14 is part of the antenna. Applicant has not directed us
to evidence establishing that one skilled in the art would have considered Hall’s
characterization of the tapered helix as part of the antenna to be incorrect.
Hall anticipates the subject matter of Claim 1.
DECISION
The Examiner’s decisions rejecting Claims 1-7 are affirmed.
AFFIRMED
bar