Appeal No. 1997-2305 Application 08/451,459 For the above reasons, we affirm the rejection of claims 21-27. Claims 28-30 require that the apparatus recited in claim 21 is combined with an internal combustion engine which receives fuel gas from the apparatus. The examiner argues that combining Eldridge’s apparatus with a conventional end use apparatus such as an internal combustion engine was within the skill in the art (answer, page 4). This argument is not persuasive because the examiner has provided no evidence that one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of appellant’s invention would have considered Eldridge’s hydrogen-rich fuel gas (page 1, lines 9-11) to be suitable as an internal combustion engine fuel. Hence, we reverse the rejection of claims 28-30. DECISION The rejection under 35 U.S.C. § 103 of claims 11-20 and 28-30 over Eldridge is reversed. The rejection under 35 U.S.C. § 103 of claims 21-27 over Eldridge is affirmed. 9Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 NextLast modified: November 3, 2007