Appeal No. 97-1149
Application No. 08/237,537
differential across the injectors encompasses the appellants’
step of “determining” the fuel injection pressure which will
maintain the fuel in the liquid state, especially when
considering that Betki establishes that this must be maintained
at a minimum value of 40psi (column 3, lines 2 and 3, and 55-58).
No such limit is set forth in the appellants’ disclosure or
claims, and they argue that they do not wish to be constrained by
such, for situations can arise in which the pressure need not be
as high as 40psi (Brief, pages 5-7).
It therefore is our view that the teachings of Betki fail to
establish a prima facie case of obviousness with regard to the
subject matter of independent claim 1, and we will not sustain
the rejection.
Independent apparatus claim 5 contains the same limitations,
and therefore the rejection on the basis of Betki suffers from
the same problems, and will not be sustained.
It follows that the rejection of dependent claims 2-4 and
6-8 also will not be sustained.
5
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007