Ex Parte Wolf et al

Board of Patent Appeals and Interferences

May 30, 2012

11807678 (B.P.A.I. May. 30, 2012)

UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
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.
11/807,678 05/29/2007 Iwan Wolf 208,229 6889
38137 7590 05/31/2012
ABELMAN, FRAYNE & SCHWAB
666 THIRD AVENUE, 10TH FLOOR
NEW YORK, NY 10017
EXAMINER
CHUKWURAH, NATHANIEL C
ART UNIT PAPER NUMBER
3721
MAIL DATE DELIVERY MODE
05/31/2012 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 BOARD OF PATENT APPEALS
AND INTERFERENCES
____________________

Ex parte IWAN WOLF and ULRICH SCHIESTL
____________________

Appeal 2010-004379
Application 11/807,678
Technology Center 3700
____________________

Before: PHILLIP J. KAUFFMAN, MICHAEL L. HOELTER, and
JAMES P. CALVE, Administrative Patent Judges.

KAUFFMAN, Administrative Patent Judge.

DECISION ON APPEAL

Appeal 2010-004379
Application 11/807,678

2
STATEMENT OF CASE
Appellants appeal under 35 U.S.C. § 134 from a rejection of claims 1-
5. We have jurisdiction under 35 U.S.C. § 6(b).
We reverse.

THE INVENTION
Appellants’ claimed invention relates to “a setting device having
control circuitry to reduce the effects of electromagnetic interference from
an ignition device for generating an ignition spark to ignite fuel in the
combustion chamber of the setting device.” Spec. 1, para. 1. Independent
claim 1, the sole independent claim on appeal, is reproduced below
(emphasis added):
1. A combustion-operated setting device, comprising:
a combustion chamber (12) for a combustible propellant;
an ignition device (16) for generating an ignition spark in
the combustion chamber (12);
a metering device (13) for metering the propellant; and
control electronics (30) for the ignition device (16) and
the metering device (13) having at least two logically separated
circuits (33, 34) which can be electrically disconnected from
one another, a first circuit (33) controlling the metering device
(13) and a second circuit controlling the ignition device (16).

REJECTIONS
Appellants seek review of the following rejections:
1. Claims 1 and 3-5 under 35 U.S.C. § 102(b) as anticipated by Walter (US
6,123,241; iss. Sep. 26, 2000).
2. Claim 2 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as unpatentable over Walter.
Appeal 2010-004379
Application 11/807,678

3
OPINION
Claims 1 and 3-5 as anticipated by Walter
Appellants argue that Walter’s circuits (fuel and ignition) are not
electrically disconnected from one another as called for in independent claim
1. App. Br. 8-14.
Claim 1 is directed to a combustion-operated setting device that
includes control electronics for the ignition device and the metering device
having at least two logically separated circuits which can be “electrically
disconnected” from one another. The Specification does not provide a
lexicographical definition of the term “electrically disconnected.” A
common definition of disconnect is a break of connection.1
The Specification describes that the claimed device utilizes logical
and electrical disconnection to overcome the known disadvantage in prior art
devices that the electromagnetic compatibility (EMC) emission of the
ignition spark can cause interference which affects the combined electronics.
Paras. [0006]-[0008].2 The Specification describes that in order to prevent
EMC interference, ignition control 34 (the first circuit) simultaneously
releases the ignition and causes switch 39 to open, so that the first and
second circuits (33, 34) are electrically disconnected when the ignition is
concluded by the energy stored in the capacitor. Paras. [0002], [0008],
[0011], [0024-0025]; fig. 2. Therefore, the ordinary meaning of electrically

1 Disconnect: An act or instance of disconnecting; a break of (esp. electrical
or telephone) connection, n. def. 1. Oxford English Dictionary (1989)
available at www.OED.com.
2 To correspond to Appellants’ references to the Specification (Reply. Br. 6),
we make reference to the version of the Specification in the pre-grant
publication of this application (US 2007/0290020 A1; pub. Dec. 20, 2007).
Appeal 2010-004379
Application 11/807,678

4
disconnected as referring to a break of electrical connection (such as by a
switch) is consistent with the Specification.
In light of this, the Examiner’s claim construction that electrically
disconnected as called for in claim 1 refers to a circuit being turned off
(having a zero or no current signal) is incorrect because electrically
disconnected, as called for in claim 1, requires a break of electrical
connection, and circuits may be turned off (zero current signal) and yet be
electrically connected. See Ans. 5-6 (finding that Walter discloses a zero
current signal at col. 11, ll. 55-57); see also Reply Br. 6-7.
The Examiner found that Walter’s fuel and ignition circuits have a
trigger or switch to initiate a cycle separately, implying that the two circuits
can be electrically disconnected from one another. Ans. 3 (citing col. 10, ll.
54-55), 5 (same); Advisory Action dated Mar. 10, 2009 (hereinafter “Adv.
Act.”). This finding is not supported by the reference. The portion of
Walters relied upon by the Examiner discloses that each circuit cycle is
initiated with the activation of a triggering device (not trigger 86). Col. 10,
ll. 54-55. Walter further discloses that a circuit cycle includes the process
for injecting fuel and the process for igniting fuel. Col. 10, ll. 50-54. Such
disclosure indicates that Walter’s circuits utilize a single signal per cycle and
does not demonstrate that Walter’s fuel and ignition circuits have a break of
electrical connection.
The Examiner found that Walter’s fuel circuit can be electrically
disconnected after 35 milliseconds before the ignition circuit ignites the
mixed air/fuel. Adv. Act. (citing col. 6, l. 50). We agree with Appellants
that this portion of Walter discloses the opening time of Walter’s metering
valve 46 and does not relate to whether Walter’s first and second circuits
Appeal 2010-004379
Application 11/807,678

5
(metering and igniting circuits) are electrically disconnected as claimed. See
App. Br. 11; Walter, col. 6, ll. 36-54.
Given this, we agree with Appellants that the Examiner has not shown
that Walter’s circuits (fuel and ignition) are electrically disconnected from
one another as called for in independent claim 1. See App. Br. 8-14.
Accordingly, we cannot sustain the rejection of independent claim 1 and its
dependent claims 3-5.

Claim 2 as unpatentable over Walter
Claim 2 depends from claim 1. The modification proposed by the
Examiner (Ans. 4) does not cure the deficiencies of the rejection of claim 1
explained, supra. As such, we cannot sustain the rejection of claim 2.

DECISION
We reverse the Examiner’s decision to reject claims 1-5.

REVERSED

hh