Appeal No. 95-4020
Application No. 08/096,337
the process chamber so as to raise the carbon potential of the
furnace atmosphere. Instead, the primary references generate a
furnace atmosphere basically by injecting a hydrocarbon gas and
oxygen directly into the process chamber.
In this regard, it is the examiner’s position that “the
instant claimed carrier gas and enriching gas are [both] fuel gas
as defined by the appellant” and that, “[c]onsequently, with
respect to the instant [independent] claims 1 and 15, steps iii)
and iv) read on providing a mixture of fuel gas with air”
(Answer, page 6). This is clearly erroneous. Each of the
independent claims on appeal explicitly defines the carrier gas
as “formed by partial reaction of fuel gas and air.” As a
result, the claimed step of “feeding the carrier gas into the
process chamber” requires feeding the aforementioned partial
reaction product and thus plainly would not “read on providing a
mixture of fuel gas with air” as urged by the examiner.
In addition to the foregoing, the examiner points out that
the applied references show that it was known in the prior art to
form carrier gas in an externally heated chamber (e.g., see the
paragraph bridging pages 6 and 7 of the Answer). We appreciate
this fact which was also pointed out by the appellant in the
background section of his specification. However, we find
4
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007