Ex parte BENZARIA - Page 2




          Appeal No. 94-4150                                                          
          Application 07/911,354                                                      


          granular solid materials wherein the container comprises four               
          substantially triangular faces which substantially constitute a             
          tetrahedron.  This appealed subject matter is adequately                    
          illustrated by independent claim 17 which reads as follows:                 

                    17.  A method of establishing contact between fluids              
          and solid materials, said method comprising passing a fluid                 
          through a container filled with granular solid materials, said              
          container comprising a closed casing permeable to said fluid,               
          said casing having pores sufficiently small to retain said                  
          granular solids, said container comprising four substantially               
          triangular faces which substantially constitute a tetrahedron,              
          and contacting said fluid with the granular solids within said              
          container, said container being sufficiently rigid to maintain              
          the substantially tetrahedron shape during said contacting step.            

               The references relied upon by the examiner in the rejections           
          on appeal are:                                                              

          Smith                    4,232,177           Nov.  4, 1980                  
          Mitchell                 4,417,433           Nov. 29, 1983                  
          Margel                   4,732,811           Mar. 22, 1988                  
          Haney et al. (Haney)     4,792,399           Dec. 20, 1988                  

               Claims ?2-15 [sic, 2-11], 17-21, and 23-27 [sic, 23, 24, 26            
          and 27] are rejected under 35 USC § 112, first and second                   
          paragraphs, as the claimed invention is not described in such               
          full, clear, concise and exact terms as to enable any person                
          skilled in the art to make and use the same, and/or for failing             
          to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter           

                                          2                                           





Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  Next 

Last modified: November 3, 2007