Appeal No. 1997-0863
Application 08/456,001
the second mixer has a substantially constant cross-sectional
flow area over its length which is greater than the cross-
sectional flow area of the first mixer. Appellants urge on
pages 7 and 8 of their reply brief that Miyata does not
disclose, teach or suggest a second mixer with the required
constant cross-sectional flow area over the length of the
mixer. We agree, and for that reason will not sustain the
examiner’s rejection of claims 25 and 29 under 35 U.S.C. §
102(b) as being anticipated by Miyata.
The last of the claims rejected by the examiner under
35 U.S.C. § 102(b) as being anticipated by Miyata are claims
26 through 28 and 31. Independent claim 26 defines a static
laminar mixing device comprising a first mixer defined by an
elongated first tubular conduit that includes a plurality of
static mixer elements serially arranged along a longitudinal
axis thereof, the first tubular conduit has a given cross-
section defining a cross-sectional flow area therethrough, and
the static mixer elements of the first mixer are specifically
set forth as “extending across the entire cross-sectional flow
12
Page: Previous 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007