Appeal No. 98-2141
Application No. 08/427,653
be intended to operate in a somewhat different manner than
that of Jones, no limitations are recited in part (f) which
are not found in the apparatus described by Jones.
The apparatus recited in claim 1 which is not disclosed
by Jones is element (d), a second rotary pump having a
plurality of vanes. As discussed above, we assume that Jones’
disclosure that pump 42 is "conventional" means that it is a
positive displacement pump. Nevertheless, we agree with the
examiner that it would have been obvious to utilize a rotary
vane pump as Jones’ second stage pump 42 along with the
turbine (rotary vane) first stage pump 52 disclosed by Jones.
The use of two rotary vane pumps, one for the first stage and
one for the second, would have been suggested to one of
ordinary skill in view of Kato’s disclosure thereof in a fuel
pump positioned in a reservoir 6. Moreover, we note that
appellant acknowledges in the first paragraph on page 2 of his
specification that a two-stage pump utilizing two axially
spaced rotors is illustrated in a prior publication. Thus,
one of ordinary skill would have found it obvious to use two
pumps of the same type on the same shaft, rather than using
two pumps of different types.
7
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007