Appeal No. 1997-0863
Application 08/456,001
same basis. In this regard, with respect to claims 4 through
13 and 23, we are of the opinion that in light of the
collective teachings of Miyata and Fredriksson it would have
been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to replace
the first mixer (1a) of Miyata with the mixer (13) of
Fredriksson so as to achieve the intimate mixing and high
degree of uniformity in the mixture discussed in Fredriksson
(e.g., col. 2, lines 18-37 and col. 4, line 45, et seq.),
thereby achieving the desired active premixing discussed in
Miyata (translation, page 4) prior to the discharge of the
pre-mixed fluids into the main mixer (1b) thereof. In our
opinion, the person of ordinary skill in the art would have
retained the relative cross-sectional flow areas taught by
Miyata by having the mixer from Fredriksson sized to be no
larger in cross-section than the mixer (1a) of Miyata.
Contrary to appellants’ position, we view the first
module (21) of Fredriksson (Fig. 2) as being “a plate
transverse to the flow of the first medium and having at least
one convergent orifice [24] therein for passage of a first
16
Page: Previous 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007