Appeal No. 1998-1219
Application 08/419,317
B. The Rejections under 35 U.S.C. § 103
Claims 1-7 stand rejected under section 103 over Keefer
(Answer, page 3). The examiner finds that Keefer teaches the
water gas shift reaction using sorbent/catalyst mix wherein
carbon dioxide is the most adsorbed product and the products
are separated by PSA [pressure swing adsorption] using a purge
gas with recycling (id.). The examiner further finds that
Keefer suggests isothermal reaction and discloses plural
countercurrent purges (id.). From these findings, the
examiner concludes that Keefer differs only in teaching “the
claimed features in a host of embodiments, rather than having
an anticipatory example.” Id.
The examiner has not pointed to any disclosure or
suggestion in Keefer that the disclosed reactions are
“isothermal.” Keefer discloses “maintaining the first end of
the adsorbent bed at substantially a first temperature, and
the second end of the adsorbent bed at substantially a second
temperature.” Col. 4, ll. 3-5; see also col. 5, ll. 3-5; col.
7, ll. 65-67. Keefer further teaches to maintain a
“temperature gradient” in the gas working space (col. 5, ll.
6
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007