Ex Parte Spamer et al

Patent Trial and Appeal Board

Jul 20, 2018

12582773 (P.T.A.B. Jul. 20, 2018)

UNITED STA TES p A TENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
APPLICATION NO. FILING DATE
12/582,773 10/21/2009
96411 7590 07/23/2018
Dinsmore & Shohl LLP
255 East Fifth Street, Suite 1900
Cincinnati, OH 45202
FIRST NAMED INVENTOR
Carl David Spamer
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.
22562-257/2009-093 5306
EXAMINER
PROBST, SAMANTHA A
ART UNIT PAPER NUMBER
3743
MAIL DATE DELIVERY MODE
07/23/2018 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 CARL DAVID SP AMER
and DANIEL FRANK GILLA Y
Appeal 2016-006327
Application 12/582,773
Technology Center 3700
Before STEVEN D.A. McCARTHY, MICHELLE R. OSINSKI and
NATHAN A. ENGELS, Administrative Patent Judges.
McCARTHY, Administrative Patent Judge.
DECISION ON APPEAL
1 STATEMENT OF THE CASE
2 The Appellants 1 appeal under 35 U.S.C. § 134(a) from the Examiner's
3 decision finally rejecting claims 1---6 under pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as
4 being unpatentable over Beckley (US 2006/0201273 Al, publ. Sept. 14,
5 2006) and Kobayashi (US 2006/0098975 Al, publ. May 11, 2006); and
6 finally rejecting claims 7-20 under§ 103(a) as being unpatentable over
7
The Appellants identify the real party in interest as Toyota Motor
Engineering & Manufacturing North America, Inc. (See Appeal Brief, dated
Oct. 9, 2015, at 2).
Appeal 2016-006327
Application 12/582,773
1 Beckley, Kobayashi and Cuevas (US 4,877,264, issued Oct. 31, 1989). We
2 have jurisdiction under 35 U.S.C. § 6(b ).
3 We REVERSE.
4 The appealed claims are directed to a vent assembly for an automotive
5 airbag that retains components during an airbag deployment. (Spec., paras.
6 1 & 2). Claims 1, 9 and 16 are independent. Claims 1 and 9 recite:
7
8
1. A vent assembly comprising:
a fin/actuator sub-assembly that includes an aperture;
9 an inner ring that includes a plurality of protrusions, each
10 protrusion including a retention surface; and
11 an annular retaining member;
12 wherein when the annular retaining member is in contact
13 with and in a retaining engagement with the fin/ actuator sub-
14 assembly and in contact with and in a retaining engagement with
15 the inner ring, a portion of the annular retaining member is
16 disposed within the aperture of the fin/actuator sub-assembly,
17 and portions of the annular retaining member contact the
18 retention surfaces of the protrusions of the inner ring.
19
20 9. A vent assembly comprising:
21 a fin/actuator sub-assembly that comprises at least one fin
22 and an actuator, the actuator comprising an aperture;
23 an inner ring that comprises a plurality of tabs, each tab
24 including a retention surface; and
25 an 0-ring;
26 wherein when the 0-ring is in contact with and in a
27 retaining engagement with the inner ring and in contact with and
28 in a retaining engagement with the fin/actuator sub-assembly, a
29 portion of the 0-ring is disposed within the aperture of the
30 actuator, and portions of the 0-ring contact the retention surfaces
31 of the tabs of the inner ring.
32
2
Appeal 2016-006327
Application 12/582,773
1 Beckley describes a rotary shutter actuator 200. (Beckley, para. 39).
2 The rotary shutter actuator 200, as depicted in Figure 7, includes a retainer
3 212 defining a cylindrical cavity 258. The rotary shutter actuator 200 also
4 includes a rotatable member 214, a plurality of shutters 16, a top cover
5 portion 270 and a dial 18. The rotatable member 214 fits into the cavity 258
6 in the retainer 212. The top cover portion 2 7 0 and the retainer 212 are
7 coupled by means of cover fasteners 2 7 4 so as to act as a rigid body. The
8 dial 18 and the rotatable member 214 are coupled by means of dial fasteners
9 44 so as to rotate as a unit relative to the top cover portion 270 and the
10 retainer 212. (Beckley, paras. 39-41). The outer surface of the rotatable
11 member 214 includes teeth 2 68 for engaging a spring-loaded ball detent to
12 prevent undesired movement of the shutters 16. (See Beckley, para. 42).
13 When a user manually turns the dial 18 relative to the top cover portion 2 70
14 and the retainer 212, the movement of the dial fasteners 44 within holes 4 0
15 in the shutters 16 causes the shutters to rotate with the dial 18 and the
16 rotatable member 214. This action opens or closes an opening through the
17 dial, the top cover portion 270 and the rotatable member 214 into an interior
18 of the retainer 212. (See Beckley, para. 42; see also id., para. 32 & Figs. 3-
19 5).
20 Kobayashi describes a water and dust resistant lens barrel unit for a
21 camera. (See Kobayashi, para. 22). As depicted in Figures 1 and 2, the lens
22 barrel unit includes a lens barrel 2 and a lens barrier 4. (See Kobayashi,
23 para. 46). The lens barrier 4 includes a pair of blades 4a. (See Kobayashi,
24 para. 48). The lens barrel 2 is cylindrical in shape, mounting a barrier
25 driving ring 7 in an interior of the barrel. (See Kobayashi, para. 46). A pair
26 of engaging shafts 6 include shaft parts 6b that extend through holes 2b in
3
Appeal 2016-006327
Application 12/582,773
1 opposite sides of the lens barrel 2 into engagement with barrier joint holes
2 4b in the blades 4a. (See Kobayashi, para. 51 ). Tension springs 8 extend
3 between hooks 6a on the engaging shafts 6 and hooks 7b on the barrier
4 driving ring 7. (See Kobayashi, para. 53).
5 When the lens is not in use, the lens barrel 2 retracts toward the body
6 of the camera. As the lens barrel 2 retracts, camming surfaces within the
7 lens barrel unit cause the barrier driving ring 7 to rotate within the lens
8 barrel in a clockwise direction. The rotation of the barrier driving ring 7,
9 combined with action of the springs 8 on the hooks 6a of the engaging shafts
10 6 cause the engaging shafts to tum about axes extending through the shaft
11 parts 6b, thereby pivoting the blades 4a of the lens barrier 4 into a closed
12 position. (See Kobayashi, paras. 65 & 66; & Figs. 1, 2 & 4A--4C).
13 Turning to claim 1, the Examiner identifies Beckley's rotatable
14 member 214 as corresponding to the recited "inner ring;" the teeth 2 68 on
15 the exterior surface ofBeckley's rotatable member 214 as corresponding to
16 the recited "plurality of protrusions;" the outer surface of Beckley' s rotatable
1 7 member 214 as corresponding to the recited "retention surfaces of the
18 protrusions;" and Beckley' s cover fasteners 2 7 4 collectively as
19 corresponding to the recited "annular retaining member." (Final Office
20 Action, mailed April 22, 2015 ("Final Act."), at 2). The Examiner finds that
21 Beckley does not describe "portions of the annular retaining member
22 contact[ing] the retention surfaces of the protrusions of the inner ring."
23 (Final Act. 3; see also Appeal Brief, dated Oct. 9, 2015 ("App. Br."), at 13).
24 The Examiner finds that Kobayashi's barrier driving ring 7
25 corresponds to the recited "inner ring" and that Kobayashi's springs 8
26 correspond to the recited "annular retaining member." (Final Act. 3; Ans. 6
4
Appeal 2016-006327
Application 12/582,773
1 & 7). This is true to the extent that each spring 8 contacts a hook 7b
2 protruding from the barrier driving ring 7. Collectively, the plurality of
3 springs 8 contact a plurality of protrusions. Nevertheless, claim 1 recites a
4 singular "annular retaining member" that contacts a plurality of protrusions.
5 Kobayashi's springs 8 constitute a plurality of members. Each spring 8,
6 which in and of itself is only a single member, contacts only one protrusion.
7 Therefore, Kobayashi fails to teach or suggest that "portions of the annular
8 retaining member contact the retention surfaces of the protrusions of the
9 inner ring." (See App. Br. 13 (emphasis omitted)). We do not sustain the
10 rejection of claims 1---6 under§ 103(a) as being unpatentable over Beckley
11 and Kobayashi.
12 Turning to claim 9, Cuevas describes an aspirating/venting module 10
13 for an automotive air bag. (See Cuevas, col. 6, 11. 15-17). As depicted in
14 Figure 2 of Cuevas, the module 10 includes an 0-ring seal 38 that acts as a
15 locking bead or detent to secure a bag 3 0 over a diffuser 3 6 of a pyrotechnic
16 bag inflator 28. (See Cuevas, col. 8, 11. 23-33). The Examiner finds that
17 Cuevas teaches an 0-ring 38 in contact with an inner ring, that is, a retainer
18 ring 32 encompassing the shell of the diffuser 36. (See Final Act. 5; see also
19 Cuevas, col. 7, 11. 48-54 & Fig. 2). The Examiner does not explain how the
20 0-ring 38 contacts a plurality of surfaces or protrusions. As such, Cuevas
21 fails to remedy the deficiencies in the teachings of Beckley and Kobayashi.
22 We do not sustain the rejection of claims 7-20 under§ 103(a) as being
23 unpatentable over Beckley, Kobayashi and Cuevas.
24
25 DECISION
26 We do not sustain any grounds of rejection entered by the Examiner.
5
Appeal 2016-006327
Application 12/582,773
1 We REVERSE the Examiner's decision rejecting claims 11-20.
2
3 REVERSED
6