Ex parte ROBINSON et al. - Page 2




               Appeal No. 1999-0036                                                                                               
               Application 08/394,012                                                                                             


               all of the claims remaining in the application.  Claim 10 has been canceled.                                       



                      Appellants’ invention relates to a burner and heat exchanger combination, wherein the burner is             

               surrounded by the heat exchanger and the heat exchanger includes a plurality of flutes surrounding the             

               burner.  A copy of independent claim 1 can be found in the Appendix to appellants’ brief.                          



                     The prior art references relied upon by the examiner in rejecting the appealed claims are:                  

               Daugirda et al. ( Daugirda)                   3,823,704              July  16, 1974                                
               Landis                                        3,947,218              Mar. 30, 1976                                 
               Krieger                                       4,971,027              Nov. 20, 1990                                 




                      Claims 1 through 4 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable over Daugirda                 

               in view of Krieger.                                                                                                



                      Claims 5 through 9 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable over Daugirda                 

               in view of Krieger as applied to claims 1 through 4 above, and further in view of Landis.                          



                      Rather than attempt to reiterate the examiner's full commentary with regard to the above-noted              

               rejections and the conflicting viewpoints advanced by the examiner and appellants regarding the                    

                                                                2                                                                 





Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  Next 

Last modified: November 3, 2007