Ex Parte SUZUKI et al

Patent Trial and Appeal Board

Dec 6, 2018

13871088 (P.T.A.B. Dec. 6, 2018)

UNITED STA TES p A TENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
APPLICATION NO. FILING DATE
13/871,088 04/26/2013
57295 7590 12/10/2018
Russell Ng PLLC
8729 Shoal Creek Blvd.
Suite 100
Austin, TX 78757
FIRST NAMED INVENTOR
KEIJI SUZUKI
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.
JP920120020-US-NP 1016
EXAMINER
PARRIES,DRUM
ART UNIT PAPER NUMBER
2836
NOTIFICATION DATE DELIVERY MODE
12/10/2018 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):
S tephanie@russellnglaw.com
PTOL-90A (Rev. 04/07)
UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
Ex parte KEIJI SUZUKI and HIDEKAZU CHUJO
Appeal 2018-001838
Application 13/871,088
Technology Center 2800
Before BEYERL YA. FRANKLIN, JEFFREY B. ROBERTSON, and
JANEE. INGLESE, Administrative Patent Judges.
INGLESE, Administrative Patent Judge.
DECISION ON APPEAL
Appellant1 requests our review under 35 U.S.C. § 134(a) of the
Examiner's decision to finally reject claims 1---6 and 8-10. We have
jurisdiction over this appeal under 35 U.S.C. § 6(b ).
We AFFIRM.
STATEMENT OF THE CASE
Appellant claims a hybrid personal computer. App. Br. 3--4. Claim 1
illustrates the subject matter on appeal and is reproduced below with
1 Appellant is the applicant, Lenovo (Singapore) Pte., Ltd. Application Data
Sheet filed April 26, 2013. According to the Appeal Brief, Lenovo
Corporation is the real party in interest. Appeal Brief filed July 18, 2017
("App. Br."), 3.
Appeal 2018-00183 8
Application 13/871,088
contested language italicized:
1. A hybrid personal computer comprising:
a first unit having
a touch screen;
a first battery;
a first system device;
a first external power-supply circuit to supply
power to said first system device and to further
supply charging power to said first battery when
said first unit is detached from said second unit;
and
a first connector including a first power terminal;
and
a second unit having
a physical keyboard;
a second battery;
a second external power-supply circuit; and
a second connector including a second power
terminal, wherein said second connector is to be
connected to said first connector when said second
unit is attached to said first unit to allow said
second battery to supply power to said first system
device through said first and second power
terminals or to allow said external power-supply
circuit to supply power from an external power
2
Appeal 2018-00183 8
Application 13/871,088
supply to said first system device through said first
and second power terminals, wherein said first unit
is allowed to operate without attaching to said
second unit.
App. Br. 8-9 (Claims Appendix) ( emphasis added).
The Examiner sets forth the following rejections in the Final Office
Action entered March 9, 2017 ("Final Act."), and maintains the rejections in
the Examiner's Answer entered October 11, 2017 ("Ans."):
I. Claims 1-3, 6, and 8-10 under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as
unpatentable over Hsu et al. (US 2011/0320405 Al, published December 29,
2011) in view of Silvester (US 2003/0112585 Al, published June 19, 2003)
and Paul et al. ( US 2007 /0260892 Al, published November 8, 2007); and
II. Claims 4 and 5 under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as unpatentable over
Hsu in view of Silvester, Paul, and Yin (US 7,471,506 B2, issued December
30, 2008).
DISCUSSION
Upon consideration of the evidence relied upon in this appeal and
each of Appellant's contentions, we affirm the Examiner's rejections of
claims 1-6 and 8-10 under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) for the reasons set forth in the
Final Office Action, the Answer, and below.
Appellant argues the claims together on the basis of claim 1, to which
we accordingly limit our discussion. App. Br. 5---6; 37 C.F.R.
§ 4I.37(c)(l)(iv). Claim 1 recites, in part, a hybrid personal computer
comprising first and second units that each include a battery and an external
power supply circuit.
Hsu discloses a computer comprising detachable display unit 32 (first
unit) and base unit 46 (second unit). Hsu ,r,r 4, 26; Figs. 3 and 4. Hsu
3
Appeal 2018-00183 8
Application 13/871,088
discloses that display unit 32 (first unit) includes rechargeable display
battery 42 (first battery). Hsu ,r 26. Hsu discloses that base unit 46 includes
a base battery (second battery) and base power source 52, which Hsu
discloses can be a power adapter that plugs into a wall outlet. Hsu ,r,r 26, 40;
Fig. 3. Appellant does not dispute the Examiner's finding that base power
source 52 (power adapter that plugs into a wall outlet) disclosed in Hsu
corresponds to the second external power supply circuit recited in claim 1.
Compare Final Act. 2, with App. Br. 5---6. Hsu discloses that when display
unit 32 (first unit) is connected to base unit 46 (second unit), display unit 32
(first unit) receives power from base power source 52 (second external
power supply circuit), and when display unit 32 (first unit) is detached from
base unit 46 (second unit), display unit 32 (first unit) receives power from
display battery 42 (first battery). Hsu ,r,r 27, 28.
The Examiner finds that Hsu does not disclose that display unit 32
(first unit) includes an external power supply circuit, and the Examiner relies
on Silvester for suggesting this feature. 2 Final Act. 2-3. Silvester discloses
a computer system including detachable tablet 251 (first unit) and base
computer 201 (second unit). Silvester ,r 16; Figs. IA-IC. Silvester
discloses that base computer 201 (second unit) includes primary power
module 212 "to provide power to the base computer 201 when connected
[to] a wall outlet" (second external power supply circuit) and a rechargeable
battery (second battery). Silvester ,r 19. Silvester discloses that tablet 251
(first unit) includes secondary power module 262 that contains a
2 A discussion of the Examiner's reasons for relying on Paul is unnecessary
for disposition of this appeal. Final Act. 3; Paul ,r 8.
4
Appeal 2018-00183 8
Application 13/871,088
rechargeable battery (first battery) to power tablet 251 when it is unmated
from base computer 201 (second unit). Silvester ,r 20. Silvester discloses
that tablet 251 (first unit) also "can be connected to a wall outlet" to receive
power, which the Examiner finds corresponds to a first external power
supply circuit. Ans. 6; Silvester ,r 20. Silvester discloses that tablet 251
(first unit) includes connectivity module 258 "to provide external ports and
connectors for receiving cables from external devices." Silvester ,r 20. The
Examiner finds that Silvester does not "explicitly teach the wall outlet is
received at the 'connectivity module 258,"' but finds that "it is inherent that
there is an external port of some kind on the first unit [tablet 251] where the
power from the wall outlet is received." Ans. 6.
The Examiner concludes that it would have been obvious to one of
ordinary skill in the art at the time of Appellant's invention "to implement an
external power-supply circuit in Hsu's first [display] unit [as disclosed in
Silvester] so that power can be supplied directly from an external power
source to the first [display] unit without the need of having the second unit
nearby, which allows for more flexibility of use of the device." Final Act. 3.
Appellant argues that Silvester does not disclose a first external power
supply circuit as recited in claim 1 because Silvester's disclosure that tablet
251 (first unit) can be connected to a wall outlet "does not mean that tablet
PC 251 includes the claimed first external power-supply circuit." Reply Br.
2. Appellant contends that "since tablet PC 251 can be directly connected to
a wall outlet, it means that tablet PC 251 does not need the claimed first
external power-supply circuit." Id. Appellant further asserts that "neither
connectivity module 258 nor secondary power module 212 in Silvester is
5
Appeal 2018-00183 8
Application 13/871,088
external to tablet PC 251," and connectivity module 258 is not involved in
the process of supplying power to Silvester's tablet 215; therefore, neither
component corresponds to the recited first external power supply circuit.
App. Br. 5; Reply Br. 2.
A preponderance of the evidence relied upon in this appeal supports
the Examiner's conclusion of obviousness, however, for reasons that follow.
As discussed above, Appellant does not dispute the Examiner's
finding that the base power source (power adapter that plugs into a wall
outlet) disclosed in Hsu corresponds to the second external power supply
circuit recited in claim 1. Rather, Appellant argues-without indicating
what an "external power supply circuit" is-that Silvester's disclosure that
tablet 251 can be connected to a wall outlet to receive power does not
correspond to a first "external power supply circuit" as recited in claim 1.
Reply Br. 2.
We find no definition or limiting description of an "external power
supply circuit" in Appellant's Specification, and Appellant does not direct us
to any such disclosure. App. Br. 5-6. Therefore, we interpret an "external
power-supply circuit" according to its plain and ordinary meaning. As set
forth in the Code of Federal Regulations, "an external power supply" is "an
external power supply circuit that is used to convert household electric
current into DC current or lower-voltage AC current to operate a consumer
product." 10 C.F.R. § 430.2. Hence, an "external power-supply circuit" is a
device that converts household electric current into a current that can be
used to operate a consumer product, such as a power adapter that plugs into
a wall outlet as disclosed in Hsu.
6
Appeal 2018-00183 8
Application 13/871,088
As discussed above, Silvester discloses that tablet 251 (first unit) "can
be connected to a wall outlet" to receive power. Although Appellant asserts
that Silvester's tablet can be "directly" connected to a wall outlet, and,
therefore, "does not need the claimed first external power-supply circuit,"
we find no disclosure in Silvester indicating that the tablet can be "directly"
connected to a wall outlet, and Appellant does not identify any such
disclosure in Silvester. Reply Br. 2.
In addition, Appellant does not sufficiently explain the basis for this
alleged distinction. Although not explicitly disclosed in Silvester, one of
ordinary skill in the art would have understood that Silvester's tablet 251
(first unit) includes means that allow the tablet to receive and utilize power
from a wall outlet. Such means could include a conventional power adapter
as disclosed in Hsu. As discussed above, it is undisputed on this appeal
record that Hsu's power adapter corresponds to an external power supply
circuit. Accordingly, we discern no error in the Examiner's finding that
Silvester's disclosure that tablet 251 (first unit) can be plugged into a wall
outlet to receive power corresponds to------or at least would have suggested-a
first external power supply circuit as recited in claim 1.
We accordingly sustain the Examiner's rejection of claim 1 under 35
U.S.C. § 103(a), and also of claims 2---6 and 8-10, which each depend from
claim 1.
DECISION
We affirm the Examiner's rejections of claims 1-6 and 8-10 under
35 U.S.C. § 103(a).
7
Appeal 2018-00183 8
Application 13/871,088
No time period for taking any subsequent action in connection with
this appeal may be extended under 3 7 C.F .R. § 1.13 6( a )(1 )(iv).
AFFIRMED
8