Ex Parte Barbus et al - Page 2

               Appeal 2007-0200                                                                             
               Application 10/445,466                                                                       
                      Appellants' claimed invention is directed to "a lance designed to blow                
               oxygen gas or other gases through the upper opening of a steelmaking vessel                  
               for the purpose of removing or retarding the formation of skull which                        
               generally is built up on the inner wall of the nose or cone section of the                   
               vessel" (Specification 1).  Appellants' lance tip has nozzles that may be                    
               selectively plugged to permit removal of both uniform and non-uniform                        
               skull deposits while avoiding damage to the vessel's refractory.  For removal                
               of generally uniformly deposited furnace skull, all of the lance tip nozzles                 
               are unplugged whereby deskulling gas is uniformly discharged to remove                       
               skull at a uniform rate throughout the circumference of the vessel.  For                     
               removal of uneven skull deposits, one or more of the tip nozzles may be                      
               plugged to avoid damage to the vessel's refractory where little or no skull                  
               may be present while other nozzles remain unplugged to melt relatively                       
               thicker deposits of skull.  (Specification 4.)  Claim 1 is representative of the             
               claimed invention and reads as follows:                                                      
                            1. A deskulling lance tip comprising:                                           
                                  a first set of deskulling nozzles; and                                    
                                  at least one additional set of deskulling                                 
                            nozzles disposed at a different orientation in said                             
                            tip relative to said first set of deskulling nozzles.                           
                      Appellants seek review of the Examiner's rejections of claims 1, 2, 4-                
               11, and 13-20 under 35 U.S.C. § 102(b) as anticipated by Watkins (US                         
               5,865,876, issued February 2, 1999) and claims 3 and 12 under 35 U.S.C.                      
               § 103(a) as unpatentable over Watkins.                                                       





                                                     2                                                      

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

Last modified: September 9, 2013