Appeal No. 1997-2674
Application No. 08/266,809
reagent through the nozzle into the gas; and when the
temperature of the gas is sensed to be outside the selected
range, activating the conduit to withdraw the nozzle from the
gas and out of the opening, and deactivating the conduit so
that no reagent is supplied through the conduit to the nozzle”
(emphasis added).
Recognizing the differences between the applied prior art
and the subject matter of the appealed claims (answer, pages 5
and 6), the examiner alleges as follows:
One skilled in the art knowing that Burton
emphasizes adding nitrogen oxide inhibiting liquid
reagent (28) only when conditions are proper for
pollutant reduction (i.e., temperature of boiler gas
(60) above about 1,300EF) and known [sic, knowing]
that Burton at least provides a means to measure the
temperature of boiler gas (60) during operation
(i.e., the thermocouples), would have been motivated
to monitor the temperature of boiler gas (60) and
activate supply conduit (24) to add or stop the
addition of nitrogen oxide inhibiting liquid reagent
(28) in response to the monitored temperature where
the addition occurs if the temperature of boiler gas
(60) is above about 1,300EF and where no addition
occurs when the temperature of boiler gas (60) is
outside of this temperature range. [Answer, pp. 5-
6.]
Further, the examiner states:
With respect to moving supply conduit (24) out
of boiler gas (60) and out of opening (31) when
6
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007