Appeal No. 1998-1273
Application No. 08/624,148
a series of adsorption and purge steps (Brief, pages 4-7). A
copy of illustrative claim 1 is attached as an Appendix to
this decision.
The examiner has relied upon the following references as
evidence of obviousness:
Stönner et al. (Stönner) 4,491,573 Jan. 1,
1985
Keefer 5,256,172 Oct. 26,
1993
Dandekar et al. (Dandekar) 5,449,172 Sep. 12,
1995
(filed Aug. 1, 1994)
Kikuchi et al. (Kikuchi), “Hydrogen Production from Methane
Steam Reforming Assisted by use of Membrane Reactor,” 509-515,
Natural Gas Conversion, Elsevier Science Publishers B.V.,
Amsterdam, 1991.
Appellants have relied upon the following reference in
rebuttal to the examiner’s rejection under the second
paragraph of 35 U.S.C. § 112:
Twigg, ed., Catalyst Handbook, 2nd ed., pp. 283-289, Wolfe
Publishing Co. (1989).
The claims on appeal stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. §
112, ¶1, “as containing subject matter which was not described
in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to
one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor(s), at the
time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed
2
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007