Appeal No. 1997-2964 Application No. 08/531,103 closed position. It is the examiner’s view that the subject matter of claim 1 is rendered obvious by the combined teachings of Lamm and Ishida. Lamm is directed to a throttle valve system for a rotary piston type of internal combustion engine. This reference discloses an intake passage (2) within which is positioned a butterfly throttle valve (5). At idle, twenty percent of the intake air flows through a bypass channel (7) and eighty percent flows through openings (10 and 11) in the throttle valve itself. While the Lamm throttle valve is at an angle to the flow of air when in the position shown in Figure 1, there is no mention in the patent of the magnitude of that angle. Thus, insofar as the subject matter of claim 1 is concerned, Lamm fails explicitly to teach the claimed angle of the throttle valve. Ishida is concerned with the same problem as the appellant; however, he solves it in a different fashion. As compared to the prior art throttle valve (Figure 1), Ishida’s valve (Figure 2), to which the examiner apparently is referring in the rejection, is thicker, is provided with a rounded configuration on its periphery, and specifically is 5Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 NextLast modified: November 3, 2007