Appeal No. 1996-1141
Application 08/109,166
OPINION
We have carefully considered all of the arguments advanced by appellants and the
examiner and agree with appellants that the examiner has failed to sustain his burden of
showing that the claimed invention would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the
art at the time the invention was made. Accordingly, the aforementioned rejections under
35 U.S.C. § 103 are not sustained. In addition, the rejection under 35 U.S.C. § 112,
second paragraph, is not well founded and is not sustained. The rejection under 35 U.S.C.
§ 112, first paragraph, is sustained since we do not believe that appellants conveyed with
reasonable clarity to those skilled in the art that, as of the filing date sought, they were in
possession of the now claimed invention.
Rejections under 35 U.S.C. § 103
Claims 20-29 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable over Soneta in
view of Coldren.
Soneta discloses an apparatus and a method of burning an exhaust gas containing
silane by introducing a first flow of a first gas mixture comprising an oxidizing species (air)
into a chamber through a first inlet located at a first position 9 (Fig. 1). Soneta introduces
4
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007