Appeal No. 1996-1141
Application 08/109,166
Shaw discloses a fume incinerator designed to completely burn all of the
combustibles within the exhaust fumes from a restaurant comprising a steel baffle plate 8
which extends across the full width of the respective chamber (Figure 2) . Shaw discloses
0
that the flow of air through the steel baffle plate then undergoes a 90 change in direction.
The examiner states that it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the
art at the time the invention was made to modify the above references’ teachings as taught
by Shaw because doing so provides an exit for the harmless gas produced by Soneta as
taught in col. 5, lines 25-30 therein (answer, page 4).
On the record, we find that the examiner has not provided sufficient evidence to
establish that it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in this art at the time the
invention was made to modify the Soneta process to include 90° turns disclosed by Shaw.
The examiner has not adequately explained why one of ordinary skill in the art would have
combined the teachings of Shaw which is directed to burning combustibles within the
exhaust fumes from a restaurant with an apparatus for burning exhaust gases containing
explosive gases. The apparatus of Soneta already has an exit 1. Specifically the
examiner fails to explain how the exit of Soneta is to be modified in view of Shaw. The
decision of the examiner is reversed.
Rejections under 35 U.S.C. § 112
Claims 24-25 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 112, second paragraph.
8
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007