Appeal No. 2004-0540 Page 2
Application No. 09/601,237
spacer mechanically reinforcing the tube and dividing the interior thereof into two
longitudinal flow channels, the mechanical connection between the peripheral wall and
the spacer being provided partly by the continuation of the material of the strip and
partly by brazing (specification, page 1). A copy of the claims under appeal is set forth
in the appendix to the appellant's brief.
The examiner relied upon the following prior art references of record in rejecting
the appealed claims:
Potier 5,219,024 Jun. 15, 1993
Le Gauyer (Le Gauyer ‘832) 5,579,832 Dec. 3, 1996
Martins 5,765,634 Jun. 16, 1998
Nonogaki et al. (Nonogaki) Hei 6[1994]-123571 May 6, 1994
(Japanese Kokai patent application)
Le Gauyer (Le Gauyer ‘221) 2,735,221 Dec. 13, 19961
(French patent document)
The following rejection is before us for review.
Claims 1-4, 6 and 7 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable
over Potier or Le Gauyer ‘832 in view of Nonogaki, Le Gauyer ‘221 or Martins.
Rather than reiterate the conflicting viewpoints advanced by the examiner and
the appellant regarding the above-noted rejection, we make reference to the answer
(Paper No. 24) for the examiner's complete reasoning in support of the rejection and to
the brief and reply brief (Paper Nos. 23 and 25) for the appellant's arguments
thereagainst.
1 We derive our understanding of the Nonogaki and Le Gauyer ‘221 references from the English
language translations obtained by the U.S. Patent Office (USPTO), copies of which are appended hereto.
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007