Appeal No. 97-2414
Application 08/417,303
rejection of claim 1 on appeal under 35 U.S.C. § 102(b) as
being anticipated by Valyi.
We next review the examiner’s rejection of claims 1, 4,
7, 8, 12, 13, 17 and 18 under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being
unpatentable over Chao-Fan Chu in view of Valyi. In this
instance, we find the examiner’s explanation of the rejection
in the final rejection (incorporated into the answer by
reference on page 3 of the examiner’s answer) to be somewhat
unclear. On page 5 of the final rejection, the examiner has
taken the position that it would have been obvious to one of
ordinary skill in the art at the time appellants’ invention
was made “to substitute the passages of Chao-Fan Chu et al for
the metal matrix material [177] of Valyi in order [sic] have
an equal flow rate through the fluid passage.” Given the
disclosure in Valyi at column 5, line 46+ that the porous
matrix material (177) therein will have gas
supplied thereto and act to provide heat over a large area of
the burner, we find the examiner’s proposed substitution of
the passages of Chao-Fan Chu for the porous matrix material of
7
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007