Appeal No. 2002-0021
Application No. 09/417,439
between the flow-through pressurized medium volume at
high and low temperatures is significantly improved as
compared with the state of the art, as a result of the special
construction of the throttling device or means as proposed
by the present invention. To this end, the single orifice of a
larger size that had been customarily used up to now has
been replaced in accordance with the present invention with
a plurality of smaller-size throttling orifices that are spaced
from each other but are arranged parallel to one another as
far as the flow of the pressurized medium through them is
concerned. Individual throttling orifices with smaller sizes
have a higher throttling effect on the medium flowing through
them, and hence permit less of the medium to flow through
them, at relatively low temperatures than the afore-
mentioned larger-size single throttling orifice. On the other
hand, the flow-through volume needed for reliable operation
at higher temperatures can be assured by appropriately
choosing the number of the individual throttling orifices.”
Independent claims 1 and 7 are representative of the subject matter on appeal
and a copy of those claims may be found in the Appendix to appellant’s brief.
The prior art references of record relied upon by the examiner in rejecting the
appealed claims are:1
Brehm et al. (Brehm) 44 31 457 C2 Feb. 20, 1997
(German Priority Document)
1 Our understanding of the two German language documents applied by the
examiner is based on translations prepared for the USPTO. For appellant’s
convenience, a copy of each of the translations is attached to this decision.
2
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007