Ex parte STEFFENS - Page 4




          Appeal No. 1996-3491                                                        
          Application 08/213,347                                                      


                    taking a temperature measurement in at least two                  
               separate locations within the regenerator vapor region;                
                    calculating the difference between the                            
          temperature    measurement of each location within the                      
          regenerator vapor region as )T; and                                         
                    increasing oxygen concentration in one of the                     
               first and second streams of air, when )T has an absolute               
               value that is greater than a predetermined value, until                
          the       absolute value of )T is less than or equal to the                 
                    predetermined value.                                              
               Prior art references relied upon by the examiner as                    
          evidence                                                                    
          of obviousness are:                                                         
          Pohlenz                       3,206,393           Sep.                      
          14, 1965                                                                    
          Luckenbach                    4,243,517           Jan.                      
          6, 1981                                                                     
          Cabrera et al. (Cabrera)           4,849,091                                
          Jul. 18, 1989                                                               

               Appealed claims 1-15 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. §                  
          112, second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to                   
          particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter              
          which applicant regards as the invention.  Appealed claims 1-8              
          stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable                  
          over the combination of Pohlenz and Luckenbach.   Appealed                  
          claims 9-15 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being                   
          unpatentable over the combination of Cabrera and Luckenbach.                
                                          4                                           





Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  13  14  Next 

Last modified: November 3, 2007