Appeal No. 1999-2435 6
Application No. 08/872,876
line 13a. To the contrary, we conclude that the reduced pressure causes the removal of
gas from the space between 10 and 12 rather than the flow of gas generating a condition
of reduced pressure in response to said flow as required by the claimed subject matter.
Furthermore, we find that Hicks discloses that, “[t]he neutral atmosphere may
consist of nitrogen with a possible trace of oxygen or other known neutral atmospheric
gases which are fed into the chamber under a slight pressure by a suitable pipeline 36.”
See column 6, lines 44-47. We further find a second vacuum line 15, “communicat[es]
with the space between the housing 5 and the tubular member 12 whereby the suction pull
of the high vacuum which is drawn from the space 14 and on the tubular member 12 may
be counteracted by the simultaneous drawing of controlled lower vacuum from the space
16." See column 3, lines 4-9. As stated by appellants in the Reply Brief, page 7, “[t]he
low pressure which is created in space 16 by vacuum line 15 and which enables a
continuous flow of gas via pipeline 36 to be supplied to chamber 28 and to pull the heated
gas from chamber 28 via opening 18 in order to maintain the neutral atmosphere in
chamber 28 at a constant level,” represents the teachings of Hicks. We further conclude
that 36 is the only inlet which supplies a flow of gas. Moreover, the examiner in his
finding has expressly relied upon outlet tube 13a to establish that 13 is an inlet tube and
has ignored the express teaching by Hicks of the only disclosed inlet tube that discloses a
flow of gas is 36. Based upon the above findings and analysis, the rejection of the
examiner is not sustainable.
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007