Appeal No. 2002-0009
Application 09/032,554
have met their burden and have provided a written description of
their invention within the meaning of 35 U.S.C. § 112, first
paragraph, we will not sustain the examiner’s rejection.
The entire thrust of appellants’ invention is directed to an
improved way of tapping pressurized refrigerant from compression
chambers of scroll compressors into a back pressure chamber that
resists a separating force tending to separate the orbiting and
non-orbiting scroll members of the compressor. While appellants
have put forth the scroll compressor seen in Figures 1A, 1B as
being “A known scroll compressor” (specification, page 1), it
does not appear to us that appellants’ invention disclosed in the
specification is in any way limited to that particular type of
scroll compressor. Indeed, the opening sentence of the
specification is of general applicability (i.e, that the
invention “relates to improved scroll compressors wherein the
pressure of fluid vented to a back pressure chamber is controlled
and optimized.” Similarly, the statements found on page 4 of the
specification under the heading “SUMMARY OF THE INVENTION” are of
general applicability to any scroll compressor having a back
pressure chamber. On page 13 of the specification, appellants
expressly indicate that there are “many other variations that can
7
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007