Appeal No. 2002-0218
Application No. 09/332,415
the claims on present appeal with the appealed claims in Appeal
No. 2002-0249. One of the novel aspects of the autothermal
reformer assemblies involved in the two appeals lies in employing
“an open cell foam catalyst bed that reduces the size and weight
of the reformer assembly.” Compare page 1 of the present
specification with page 1 of the specification of Application
09/321,390. This open cell foam catalyst bed is also said to
provide “an enhanced catalyst and heat transfer surface area
. . . and . . . an enhanced gas mixing and distribution flow
path.” Compare page 3 of the present specification, with page 3
of the specification of Application 09/321,390. However, the
autothermal reformer assembly in this appeal, unlike the previous
one, is directed to converting methanol and ethanol fuels, rather
than hydrocarbon fuels (claim 23) and employing a copper and/or
zinc catalyst bed subsequent a noble catalyst bed (claims 1, 20
and 22). Details of the appealed subject matter are illustrated
in representative claims 1, 13, 18, and 23 which are reproduced
below1:
1 The appellant has indicated (Brief, page 3) that claims 1,
2, 7, 9, 12, 16, 17, 19, 20 and 22 will stand or fall together,
claims 13-15 will stand or fall together, and claims 23 and
18 stand or fall separately. Therefore, for purposes of this
appeal, we limit our discussion to claims 1, 13, 18 and 23
consistent with 37 CFR § 1.192(c)(7)(2001). See In re McDaniel,
293 F.3d 1379, 1383, 63 USPQ2d 1462, 1465 (Fed. Cir. 2002)(“If
2
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007