Appeal No. 1996-3433
Application No. 08/198,955
[I]t provides greater versatility in flow rates,
while insuring better mixing; that it substantially
eliminates or at least minimizes unwanted side
reactions of SO with other components, such as
3
ammonia, which produce heat stable salts tending to
plug downstream equipment; and that it thereby
achieves longer on-stream time, produces a higher
ratio of acid gas to oxidant gas, permits better
control of the ratio of these two gases over a wide
flow range, decreases maintenance expense, makes for
higher recovery of sulfur accompanied by fewer
emissions, and achieves cost savings in manufacture
of the apparatus.
The examiner’s § 103 rejection is premised upon the
obviousness of replacing concentric circular rows of nozzle
apertures (36, 38 and 40) in the apparatus described in Bond
with the claimed single, continuous, annular slot. See
Answer, pages 3 and 4. According to the examiner (Id.), one of
ordinary skill in the art would have been led to modify the
apparatus of Bond by replacing the nozzle apertures therein
with the single, continuous, annular slot supposedly described
by both Michel and Aghnides. We do not subscribe to the
examiner’s position.
As acknowledged by appellant, Bond does disclose an
apparatus identical to that claimed, except for the claimed
single continuous annular slot. See Figure 1 in conjunction
with columns 3 and 4. Rather than incorporating the claimed
4
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007