Appeal No. 94-4357
Application No. 07/739,050
drawing disclosure be accidental or intentional”). The
dispositive issue is, therefore, whether it would have been
obvious to obtain a recycle gas containing the claimed level
of contaminant, i.e. carbon dioxide, prior to introducing the
resulting recycle gas to an ozonator.
As indicated by the examiner at pages 3 and 6 of the
Answer, the Namba reference describes (column 2, lines 34-39)
that:
The inventors have studied and found that when
the
gas in the oxygen recycle system comprises 90 to 95% of
oxygen and 5 to 10% of nitrogen, a superior
ozonizing effect can be obtained by using a CO gas
2
concentration of 1 to 2% in comparison with that of
zero.
Although the Namba reference teaches preference for
including a CO gas concentration of 1 to 2% in an oxygen
2
recycle stream for ozone generation, it does not foreclose one
of ordinary skill in the art from employing a higher
concentration of carbon dioxide in the oxygen recycle stream.
In fact, appellants acknowledge at page 6 of the Brief that it
is known to those skill in the art to employ an oxygen gas
containing a carbon dioxide concentration up to 10 wt% to
generate ozone with little loss in energy yield. The
9
Page: Previous 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007