Appeal No. 2002-0064
Application No. 09/084,042
The references cited the examiner in the final rejection
against the claims are:
Pauletta 3,468,634 Sep. 23, 1969
Yaron et al. (Yaron) 5,429,177 Jul. 4, 1995
Claim 1 stands rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 102(b) as being
anticipated by Pauletta.
Claims 2-5 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as being
unpatentable over Pauletta.
Claims 6-12 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as being
unpatentable over Pauletta in view of Yaron.
Reference is made to appellant’s main and reply briefs
(Paper Nos. 17 and 19) and to the examiner’s answer (Paper No.
18) for the respective positions of appellant and the examiner
regarding the merits of these rejections.
I. The anticipation rejection of claim 1
Independent claim 1 reads as follows:
1. An improved regenerator comprising a plurality of
separate concentric layers of regenerator foil installed in
a generally cylindrical space.
Pauletta, discussed in more detail below, pertains to a
concentric tube odor eliminator. Pauletta’s device includes a
2
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007