Appeal No. 1997-0616
Application No. 08/318,205
C. maintaining a total pressure of at
least about 25 PSIA in said heating
vessel gas space while expelling
pollutant from rich desiccant in said
heating vessel and into said column;
and
D. discharging gaseous pollutant through
said column vapor outlet, while
preventing discharge of said gaseous
pollutant from said reconcentration
system into the atmosphere and
recovering reconcentrated desiccant.
The examiner has not relied on any prior art reference as
evidence of unpatentability.
Nevertheless, claims 13 through 30, 32 through 53, and 55
through 57 on appeal stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 102(b) as
"based upon a public use or sale of the invention." (Examiner’s
answer, page 3; final Office action, pages 3-4.)
We reverse the aforementioned rejection.
The examiner points out that the appellant received, more
than one year before the effective filing date of the subject
application, a purchase order from an oil company to investigate
alternatives for VOC emission control and to provide a
recommendation. (Final Office action, page 3; appellant's
statement captioned "INFORMATION RE PRE-CRITICAL DATE ACTIVITY,"
filed May 24, 1993, paper 5.) The examiner then refers to page
1 of the appellant's supplemental statement ("SUPPLEMENTAL
3
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007