Appeal No. 1997-2674
Application No. 08/266,809
efficiency (id.). According to the appellant, the invention
achieves this objective by employing a conduit and spray
nozzle that is normally retracted from the harsh environment
of the boiler and inserted into the flue gas passageways only
when a temperature sensor, operatively located at the conduit
entrance to the flue gas passageway, senses the optimum
temperature for reagent injection (id.).
As evidence of obviousness, the examiner relies upon the
following prior art reference:
Burton 4,842,834 June 27, 1989
Claims 6, 7, 9, and 10 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. §
103 as unpatentable over Burton (examiner’s answer, pages 4-
7).
We have carefully reviewed the entire record, including
all of the arguments and evidence advanced by both the
examiner and the appellant in support of their respective
positions. This review leads us to conclude that the
aforementioned § 103 rejection is not well founded.
Accordingly, we reverse. The reasons for our determination
follow.
3
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007