UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD Ex parte VINCENT HOLTZ and JEAN SIEFFERT Appeal 2011-005241 Technology Center 3600 Before JAMES P. CALVE, SCOTT A. DANIELS, and BEVERLY M. BUNTING, Administrative Patent Judges. DANIELS, Administrative Patent Judge. DECISION ON APPEAL
STATEMENT OF CASE Appellants appeal under 35 U.S.C. 134(a) from a rejection of claims 1-24. We have jurisdiction under 35 U.S.C. 6(b). We reverse. The claims are directed to a torque converter clutch control system having a lock mode including both a low slip regulation sub-mode and a hard lock sub-mode. Claim 1, reproduced below, is illustrative of the claimed subject matter: appeal is: 1. A torque converter clutch control system, comprising: a mode determination module that receives a lock request to enter a lock mode that includes a lock low slip regulation mode and a hard lock mode, and that selects between the lock low slip regulation mode and the hard lock mode based on the lock request; and a pressure control module that regulates pressure to a torque converter during the lock low slip regulation mode such that a target slip is maintained and commands a maximum pressure to the torque converter during the hard lock mode to prevent slip. REFERENCES The prior art relied upon by the Examiner in rejecting the claims on Koenig US 5,531,302 Jul. 2, 1996 REJECTIONS The Examiner made the following rejections: Claims 1, 2 and 4-24 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C 102(b) as being anticipated by Koenig. Ans. 4. 2
Claim 3 stands rejected under 35 U.S.C 103(a) as being unpatentable over Koenig. Ans. 7. ANALYSIS Rejection I Claims 1, 2 and 4-24 as anticipated by Koenig The Examiner found that Koenig discloses all the elements of claim 1, specifically, a torque converter clutch control system having a torque converter clutch (TCC), a mode determination module that selects between a lock low slip regulation mode (controlled capacity (CC mode)) and a hard lock mode, and a pressure control module that regulates pressure to the torque convertor to maintain a target slip in the lock low slip regulation mode and a maximum pressure in the hard lock mode to prevent slip. Ans. 4 citing Koenig col. 2, ll. 1-9. Appellants argue that despite disclosure of a clutch slip control (CC) mode and a lock mode, Koenig does not teach or suggest a lock request to enter a lock mode that includes a lock low slip regulation mode and a hard lock mode as recited in claim 1. App. Br. 10. Appellants differentiate their claim from Koenig based on the associative arrangement of two specific claim elements, a lock request and a lock mode, asserting that Koenig does not disclose receiving (1) a lock request to enter (2) a lock mode that includes a lock low slip regulation mode and a hard lock mode. App. Br. 11, Reply Br. 5-7. Appellants contend that Koenig is silent as to the TCU 180 receiving a lock request to activate TCC control where Koenig only discloses controlling the TCC based upon various engine, braking and transmission parameters. Reply Br. 5. Appellants argue that having received the lock request, Koenig further fails to disclose the lock mode 3
including two sub-modes, (a) the lock low slip regulation mode, and (b) the hard lock mode. App. Br. 10, Reply Br. 5-7. The Examiner s finding that a slip regulation is disclosed by the CC mode in Koenig s TCC control system is partially correct. However claim 1 does not merely recite that the torque converter clutch control system comprises a slip regulation mode and a hard lock mode. Claim 1 requires first that the mode determination module receives a lock request to enter the lock mode, and second, that the lock mode includes both a lock low slip regulation mode and a hard lock mode. The Examiner s reasoning that the lock request was met by the TCC control being activated does not explain how Koenig discloses the lock request element of Appellants claims. Ans. 8. Koenig s TCC is not activated solely for the LOCK MODE, but is operative at all times in both modes to effectuate transitions back and forth between the CC Mode and the LOCK MODE. See Koenig Col. 2, ll. 2-8. The lock mode as recited in claim 1 is not merely a label as the Examiner interprets this claim term. Ans. 8. The lock mode has a particular meaning in the claim relative to the TCC control, that is when operating conditions are appropriate and a lock request is received, the clutch essentially locks the TC impeller to the TC turbine. Consistent with our understanding of a lock request, the lock mode cannot, as the Examiner found, be interpreted as any active torque convertor control. Ans. 8. Our understanding is consistent with Appellants Specification which explains that it is known in the art: [w]hen an "on mode" is commanded, pressure to the clutch is electronically controlled to achieve the target slip value. The converter is not completely locked. When a "lock on mode" is commanded, a maximum pressure is supplied to the torque 4
converter to fully lock the torque converter clutch. essentially eliminated in the lock on mode. Slip is Spec. para. [0007]. The meaning of lock mode as understood by those of ordinary skill in the art therefore does not extend across the entire range of active torque converter control to cover also the on mode as the Examiner interprets it. Appellants lock mode is a distinct mode of the torque convertor control which must be requested and entered into after receiving the lock request from the mode determination module. Our understanding of lock mode also comports with Fig. 18A of Koenig to which the Examiner refers, showing slip ( N) as controlled by the TCC first in the on mode i.e. CC Mode, and then in the LOCK MODE. Ans. 8. With the TCC operative at all times between the distinct CC mode and Lock Mode in Koenig there is no lock request to enter the distinct Lock Mode as shown in Fig. 18A between t 3 and t 4 which illustrates the complete lock-up of the clutch with no low slip regulation. 1 Consequently, the CC Mode disclosed in Koenig is properly equated with the on mode as known in the art and is not included in, or part of the separate and distinct lock mode as claimed. We agree with Appellants that Koenig does not disclose a lock request to enter a lock mode having both (1) the lock low slip regulation mode, and (2) the hard lock mode, Koenig fails to disclose a lock request and only discloses the hard lock mode with no low slip regulation. Accordingly, we do not sustain the Examiner s anticipation rejection of claim 1. 1 We understand the initial segment of N tending towards zero 0 slip just after t 3 to be a transition to complete clutch lock-up based on the over pressure supplied to the TC by the torque convertor fluid pump. 5
As claims 2 and 4-11 depend directly or indirectly from claim 1, we do not sustain the rejection of these claims. Where independent claim 12 includes the same or similar limitations to claim 1 wherein the lock mode includes a lock low slip regulation mode and a hard lock mode, we also do not sustain the rejection of claim 12 and its relative dependent claims 13-21. Independent claim 22 similarly recites to claims 1 and 12 that in a lock mode of the clutch the lock request includes one of a lock low slip request and a hard lock request, and therefore we also do not sustain the anticipation rejection of clam 22 and its dependent claims 23 and 24. Rejection II Claim 3 as unpatentable over Koenig. With respect to the obviousness rejection of claim 3 which depends directly from claim 1, the modification of Koenig does not remedy the deficiencies of Koenig as described supra. The rejection of claim 3 cannot likewise be sustained. DECISION For the above reasons, the Examiner s rejection of claims 1-24 is REVERSED. REVERSED ELD 6