Appeal No. 1996-2320
Application 08/221,224
elements of appellant’s claim 1 except the use of stationary
mixing elements to promote plug flow.
The examiner argues that “Koch teaches that the presence
of baffles in a hollow tube reactor will produce mixing, but
there is no indication by Koch that such mixing is of the plug
flow type” (answer, page 3). The examiner, therefore, relies
upon Marske.
Marske teaches that in chambers for contacting water
sewage with chlorine, longitudinal baffles are more efficient
than cross baffles, and plug flow is best achieved with a high
length to width ratio. The examiner argues that the
references indicate that if Koch’s static mixers were placed
in Guertin’s reactor, mixing would occur, and Marske indicates
that this mixing would be plug flow (answer, page 5).
Apparently, the examiner overlooked the teaching on page 7 of
Koch regarding use of his static mixing units to produce plug
flow.
The examiner provides no explanation as to why one of
ordinary skill in the art would have desired plug flow in
Guertin’s reactor, or why, to obtain that plug flow, such a
-4-4
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007