Haegerstam, Joakim

Patent Trials and Appeals Board

Oct 28, 2019

14395534 - (D) (P.T.A.B. Oct. 28, 2019)

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.
14/395,534 10/20/2014 Joakim Haegerstam 000009-784 7347
51707 7590 10/28/2019
WRB-IP LLP
801 N. Pitt Street
Suite 123
ALEXANDRIA, VA 22314
EXAMINER
TRAN, LONG T
ART UNIT PAPER NUMBER
3747
NOTIFICATION DATE DELIVERY MODE
10/28/2019 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):
HARRY@WRB-IP.COM
USPTO@dockettrak.com
PTOL-90A (Rev. 04/07)
UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
____________

BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
____________

Ex parte JOAKIM HAEGERSTAM
____________

Appeal 2018-003349
Application 14/395,534
Technology Center 3700
____________

Before STEFAN STAICOVICI, MICHELLE R. OSINSKI, and
LEE L. STEPINA, Administrative Patent Judges.

OSINSKI, Administrative Patent Judge.
DECISION ON APPEAL

STATEMENT OF THE CASE
Appellant1 appeals under 35 U.S.C. § 134(a) from the Examiner’s
decision rejecting claims 1–8. An oral hearing was held on October 10,
2019. We have jurisdiction over the appeal under 35 U.S.C. § 6(b).
We REVERSE.

1 We use the term “Appellant” to refer to “applicant” as defined in 37 C.F.R.
§ 1.42. Appellant identifies the real party in interest as Volvo Construction
Equipment AB.
Appeal 2018-003349
Application 14/395,534

2
THE CLAIMED SUBJECT MATTER
Claim 1, the sole independent claim, is reproduced below.
l. An arrangement for controlling the temperature of air
being fed to a vehicle engine, the arrangement comprising an
engine compartment in which the engine is arranged, the engine
compartment being provided with an ambient air intake
allowing an airflow into the engine compartment, the engine
being provided with an engine air intake arranged inside the
engine compartment, and an air fan for forcing the airflow via
the ambient air intake into the inside of the engine
compartment, the engine air intake being arranged in a position
allowing at least a substantial part of the airflow to enter the
engine air intake wherein the air fan is arranged for selectively
being operated in:
- a first mode of operation with a relatively high speed
for providing an airflow from the ambient air intake to the
engine air intake, thereby decreasing the temperature of the air
flowing into the engine air intake; or
- a second mode of operation with a relatively low speed
for providing an airflow from within the engine compartment to
the engine air intake, thereby increasing the temperature of the
air flowing into the engine air intake.

EVIDENCE
The Examiner relied on the following evidence in rejecting the claims
on appeal:
Kajitani US 5,284,025 Feb. 8, 1994
Yabuki US 2009/0217655 A1 Sept. 3, 2009

REJECTIONS
I. Claims 1–4 and 6–8 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 102(b) as
anticipated by Yabuki. Final Act. 2–4.
II. Claim 5 stands rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as unpatentable over
Yabuki and Kajitani. Id. at 5–6.
Appeal 2018-003349
Application 14/395,534

3
OPINION
Rejection I
The Examiner finds that Yabuki discloses, among other things, an
engine air intake 30 located inside an engine compartment and an air fan 25
for forcing airflow via an ambient air intake into the inside of the engine
compartment. Final Act. 3. With respect to the engine air intake, the
Examiner states that “paragraph 0072 of Yabuki explicitly describes ‘air
taken in through an air cleaner 39 . . . and an intake flow passage 30’” and
that “Figure 2 of Yabuki further shows air intake flow passage 30 connected
to air cleaner 39, and ends there because that is where ambient air is being
drawn in . . . for the intake passage.” Ans. 5–6.
With respect to the air fan 25 for forcing airflow via an ambient air
intake 30 into the inside of the engine compartment, the Examiner references
paragraph 2 of Yabuki. Final Act. 2–3; Yabuki ¶ 2 (describing “a cooling
fan disposed in the engine room [that] is driven to introduce open air through
intake holes formed in the cover, thereby producing cooling air” that is
“introduced into the engine room and passes through various heat
exchangers for cooling them,” including, for example, “an intercooler for
cooling compressed air pressurized by a turbocharger which is mounted on
the engine”).
As to air fan 25 selectively being operated in (i) a first mode with a
high speed for providing an airflow from the ambient air intake to the engine
air intake, thereby decreasing the temperature of air flowing into the engine
air intake; and (ii) a second mode with a low speed for providing an airflow
from within the engine compartment to the engine air intake, thereby
increasing the temperature of the air flowing into the engine air intake, the
Appeal 2018-003349
Application 14/395,534

4
Examiner finds that Yabuki discloses operation of air fan 25 at high speed
Nmax and low speed Nmin in Figures 4–6, along with a logic chart in Fig. 3 to
determine the desired fan rotation speed. Final Act. 3.
Appellant argues that Yabuki fails to disclose an air fan selectively
being operated in first and second modes in accordance with the claims.
Appeal Br. 5. More particularly, Appellant argues “the sole purpose of the
fan 25 [in Yabuki] is to provide cooling air for each one of an intercooler, a
radiator 23 and an oil cooler 24.” Id. (citing Yabuki ¶ 70) (emphasis
omitted). Appellant continues that “[i]t is not at all understood how this
flow can have any impact on whether air that enters the intake flow passage
30 is from engine compartment or from ambient air” and “the air that enters
the intake flow passage 30 will only be dependent on the rotational speed of
the turbo 38.” Id. Appellant continues that “there is no disclosure regarding
[the] source [of air that enters the intake flow passage 30]” and “[i]t is
merely speculation that the air entering the engine air intake will be from an
engine compartment or from ambient air, much less that it will do so based
on the speed of the fan.” Reply Br. 4 (emphasis omitted). Appellant also
argues that “there is no reason to expect that the speed of the fan 25 will
have any influence on the temperature of the air entering the air cleaner 39,
much less the intake flow passage 30 through the turbo charger 38.”).
Appeal Br. 6.
We agree with Appellant that it is not clear how the speed of air fan
25 affects the source and/or temperature of airflow to Yabuki’s intake flow
passage 30. At most, the Examiner explains that “[t]he speed of the fan 25
of Yabuki determines the amount of air, and thus the amount of cooling,
[that] is applied to the engine components.” Ans. 8 (citing Yabuki ¶ 2). As
Appeal 2018-003349
Application 14/395,534

5
pointed out by Appellant, “[t]he mere fact that a fan causes air to pass
externally over coils of a heat exchanger does not mean that that same fan
causes air to flow internally through those coils, much less through a flow
passage connected to the heat exchanger.” Reply Br. 4; Yabuki Fig. 2. In
other words, the Examiner has not adequately explained how operation of
Yabuki’s air fan 25 at a high speed (e.g., Nmax) will result in providing an
airflow from the ambient air intake to the Examiner-identified engine air
intake 30 so as to decrease the temperature of air flowing into the engine air
intake, whereas operation of air fan 25 at a low speed (e.g., Nmin) will result
in providing an airflow from within the engine compartment to the
Examiner-identified engine air intake 30 so as to increase the temperature of
air flowing into the engine air intake, as required by claim 1.
For the foregoing reasons, we do not sustain the rejection of claim 1,
and claims 2–4 and 6–8 which depend therefrom, under 35 U.S.C. § 102(b)
as anticipated by Yabuki.
Rejection II
The Examiner’s rejection of claim 5 under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) relies
on the same erroneous finding that Yabuki discloses an air fan arranged for
selectively being operated in a first mode for providing an airflow from the
ambient air intake to the engine air intake and a second mode for providing
an airflow from within the engine compartment to the engine air intake.
Final Act. 5–6. The Examiner does not explain how Kajitani would remedy
the deficiency of Yabuki. Accordingly, we do not sustain the rejection of
claim 5 under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as unpatentable over Yabuki and Kajitani.

Appeal 2018-003349
Application 14/395,534

6
DECISION
The Examiner’s decision to reject claims 1–8 is REVERSED.
In summary:
Claims
Rejected
35 U.S.C. § Reference(s)/Basis Affirmed Reversed
1–4, 6–8 102(b) Yabuki 1–4, 6–8
5 103(a) Yabuki, Kajitani 5
Overall
Outcome
1–8

REVERSED