Ex Parte SRINATH - Page 3




             Appeal No. 2002-1519                                                               Page 3                
             Application No. 09/433,344                                                                               


                           at least one outlet from said mixing chamber, and                                          
                           a pair of control ports at said upstream end of said oscillation vortex                    
                    mixing chamber such that said jet of carrier liquid entrains fluent material                      
                    alternately from said control ports,                                                              
                           and passages for coupling said pair of control ports to one or more fluent                 
                    material source for mixing by vortex-action in said oscillation vortex mixing                     
                    chamber with said jet of carrier liquid prior to exiting from said oscillation vortex             
                    mixing chamber through said at least one outlet,                                                  
                           whereby when said jet of carrier liquid entrains fluent material from said                 
                    control ports, said jet of carrier  liquid oscillates and oscillation of said jet of              
                    carrier liquid stops when entrainment of fluent material through said control ports               
                    ceases.                                                                                           


                    Claims 1 and 4 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 102(b) as being anticipated by                    
             U.S. Patent No. 3,669,135 to Starr.                                                                      


                    Claims 2 and 5 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable over                    
             Starr.                                                                                                   


                    We make reference to the answer (Paper No. 22, mailed December 4, 2001) for                       
             the examiner's complete reasoning in support of the rejections, and to the brief (Paper                  
             No. 20, filed September 25, 2001) for the appellant's arguments thereagainst.                            


                                                      OPINION                                                         
                    In reaching our decision in this appeal, we have given careful consideration to                   
             the appellant's specification and claims, to the applied prior art reference to Starr, and               







Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  Next 

Last modified: November 3, 2007