Appeal No. 1997-0793
Application 08/107,633
argues that Roetheli’s combined gas stream, unlike that of
appellant, is not used further in the process (brief, page
11). Roetheli’s suggested combined stream, however, would be
sent to the dust separator and separated into a combustible
gas stream and a hot particulate stream as discussed above
regarding step (d).
Appellant argues that Roetheli does not disclose a
fluidized bed using steam and hot air (brief, page 9). As
discussed above, both Roetheli’s combustion chamber and gas
generator are fluidized beds, and air is added to the
combustion chamber and steam is added to the gas generator.
If appellant’s claim 1 is interpreted as requiring that all
portions of the fluidized bed be in a single vessel then, as
explained above with respect to step (b), the applied prior
art would have fairly suggested, to one of ordinary skill in
the art, including air in Roetheli’s gas generator.
Appellant argues that Roetheli merely teaches that the
coal is fluidized, i.e., flows like a liquid, and does not
state that
-8-8
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007