Appeal No. 96-0088
Application No. 08/038,426
combustion, column 1, lines 48-51. We find the catalytic
activity sufficient to meet the catalytic characteristics
required for “at least one compound of a three way metal
catalyst.” The concentration of 0.001% disclosed by Lyons
corresponds to 10 mg/l. Page 2, column 1, line 57 and page 2,
column 2, line 57. We accordingly find that the concentration
range taught by Lyons meets both the requirements of noble
metals and non-noble metals alike. As to the deposition of
the metal catalyst downstream, on the record before us, we see
no reason to conclude that all or even most of the catalyst is
deposited in the combustion chamber. We are in agreement with
the examiner’s position that gasoline additives are,
“inherently entrained in emission fumes from the engine and
are deposited on the catalytic vessel downstream.” See
Answer, page 10, lines 1-3. The same analysis applies to
appellants’ claim 23. Accordingly, we sustain the section
102(b) rejection over Lyons.
We next turn to the rejection of claims 1, 4 through 9,
16, 23 and 27 under 35 U.S.C. § 102(b) over Bowers ‘302. We
shall likewise sustain the rejection of claims 1, 4 through 9,
and 16 over the patent to Bowers. We shall not sustain the
12
Page: Previous 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007