Appeal No. 94-4357
Application No. 07/739,050
159 USPQ 342, 344 (CCPA 1968). All of the disclosures in a
reference must be evaluated for what they would have fairly
suggested to one having ordinary skill in the art. In re Boe,
355 F.2d 961, 965, 148 USPQ 507, 510 (CCPA 1966).
In rejecting the subject matter of claims 1, 2, 4 through
7,
15 through 20, 33 through 36 and 51 through 54 under 35 U.S.C.
§ 103, the examiner states (Answer, page 3):
FRITZVOLD ET AL teaches adding an oxygen containing
feed gas to an ozone generator (9c), generating
ozone from the oxygen containing feeds gas (9c),
bleaching pulp with the ozone gas generated (5c),
recycling exhaust gas and removing CO (see (9c)
2
“Organic CO Scrubber”) from the exhaust gas prior to
2
directing
the exhaust gas into the ozone generator (9c).
Although appellants state at page 5 of the Brief that
“no details of operation are disclosed,” they do not dispute
the examiner’s finding that the drawings in the Fritzvold
reference either taught or would have suggested to one of
ordinary skill in the art the above-mentioned claim
limitations. See also In re Meng, 492 F.2d 843, 847, 181 USPQ
94, 97 (CCPA 1974)(“a claimed invention may be anticipated or
rendered obvious by a drawing in a reference whether the
8
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007