Appeal No. 1998-1711 Page 18
Application No. 08/506,387
"means for connecting said further reservoir with said at least one connecting duct." To
maintain this connection between the compensator line and the expansion chamber in the
Eustache assembly would have been obvious to one skilled in the art to preserve the utility of
the engine coolant expansion chamber.
CONCLUSION
To summarize, the decision of the examiner to reject claims 1-10 under the second
paragraph of 35 U.S.C. § 112, claims 4-7 under the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. § 112,
claims 1-3 under 35 U.S.C. § 102(b) as being anticipated by Eustache and claims 9 and 10
under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable over Eustache is reversed. The examiner's
decision to reject claims 4-6 and 8 as being unpatentable over Eustache in view of Penkwitz is
affirmed. Additionally, new rejections of claims 1-3, 9 and 10 are entered pursuant to 37 CFR
§ 1.196(b).
In addition to affirming the examiner's rejection of one or more claims, this decision
contains new grounds of rejection pursuant to 37 CFR § 1.196(b)(amended effective Dec. 1,
1997, by final rule notice, 62 Fed. Reg. 53131, 53197 (Oct. 10, 1997), 1203 Off. Gaz. Pat.
Office 63, 122 (Oct. 21, 1997)). 37 CFR § 1.196(b) provides, "A new ground of rejection
shall not be considered final for purposes of judicial review."
Regarding any affirmed rejection, 37 CFR § 1.197(b) provides:
(b) Appellant may file a single request for rehearing within two months from the
date of the original decision . . . .
Page: Previous 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007