Appeal No. 1998-1004
Application 08/401,984
a second filter comprising a second filter main body, a first counter room provided downstream
of said second filter main body, and a second counter room provided upstream of said second filter
main body;
first and second exhaust gas inlets for separately supplying exhaust gas to said first and second
filters, respectively, said first and second exhaust gas inlets being connected to and receiving exhaust gas
from a common inlet pipe;
first and second exhaust gas outlets for discharging exhaust gas from the first and second filters,
respectively;
a process portion isolated from exhaust gas flow through the filters, in which fine particles
removed from the filters are fired, said process portion comprising an electric heater and a plate,
wherein said plate is provided on said electric heater or said electric heater is embedded in said plate;
transport means for interconnecting each of the second counter rooms to said process portion;
a counter air supply means for supplying a counter flow of air to the first counter rooms, along a
flow direction opposite to the flow direction of the exhaust gas;
first and second gas exhaust supply valves provided in the first and second exhaust gas inlets,
respectively; and
first and second exhaust gas discharge valves respectively provided in said first and second
exhaust gas outlets.
The references relied on by the examiner are:
Sword 1,921,047 Aug. 8, 1933
Kunowich 2,150,687 Mar. 14, 1939
Comstock 2,653,213 Sep. 22, 1953
Friedberg 2,798,928 Jul. 9, 1957
Levendis et al. (Levendis) 5,253,476 Oct. 19, 1993
The examiner has advanced the following grounds of rejection on appeal: the rejection of the
appealed claims under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as unpatentable over Levendis, of record prior to the answer;
and, the rejection of the appealed claims under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as unpatentable over Levendis taken
together with any one of Sword, Kunowich, Comstock and Friedberg, a new ground of rejection in the
answer.1
We affirm each of these grounds of rejection.
1 Appellants have summarized in the brief (page 7, n.2) the grounds of rejection of record as of the final
rejection of June 10, 1996 (Paper No. 10) and the sole ground of rejection under § 103 that remained
after the filing of the amendment of October 7, 1996 (see above p. 1).
- 2 -
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007