Appeal No. 2002-0707 5
Application No. 09/093,574
On the record before us however, there is no evidence that teaches or suggests that zeolite,
activated carbon or indeed any of the “getters” would also act as a barrier for the high
level gamma radiation emitted by spent fuel rods, as compared to the low level radiation
disclosed by Stucky. Indeed, it is well known that spent fuel rods contain the highest
concentration of radioactivity known. These rods are usually shielded with water and thick
lead walls and are stored on site at nuclear plants.
Accordingly, the basic assumption of the examiner that spent fuel rods are merely
another form of radioactive waste material which necessarily can be treated in the same
manner as the balance of the radioactive waste of Stucky fails.
The above analysis likewise applies to claim 13 which contains each of the
limitations of claim 1 and additionally requires a container formed with steel walls and
welded steel plates.
The references to Markowitz, Saha and Gaffney fail to overcome the deficiency of
Stucky.
DECISION
The rejection of claims 1, 3, 4 and 7 through 12 under 35 U.S.C. §103(a) as
being unpatentable over Stucky is reversed.
The rejection of claim 5 under 35 U.S.C. §103(a) as being unpatentable over
Stucky in view of Markowitz is reversed.
The rejection of claim 6 under 35 U.S.C. §103(a) as being unpatentable over
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007