Appeal No. 2002-0864
Application 09/022,817
The examiner properly finds (Answer, page 5) that:
The Applicants’ description of the prior
art set forth on pg. 2 to pg. 3 in their
specification discloses a method for treating
combustion exhaust gas from a boiler,
comprising:
adding ammonia to the combustion exhaust
gas so that the ammonia can react with and
remove nitrogen oxides out of the combustion
exhaust gas;
subjecting the4 [sic, the] exhaust gas
to a wet desulfurizing unit so that sulfur
oxides and mercury chloride can be removed
out of the gas.
According to the examiner (Answer, page 6), both Kato and Tabata
teach that the above nitrogen oxide removal (conventional
denitrating step) is normally carried out in the presence of the
claimed denitrating catalyst. We find that both Kato and Tabata
teach that nitrogen oxides are removed from a combustion exhaust
gas with ammonia in the presence of the claimed denitrating
catalyst at a temperature below 600oC. See Kato, pages 18/27
and 21/27 and Tabata, pages 12/17 and 14/17.
The dispositive question is whether it would have been
prima facie obvious to add a specific amount of a mercury
chlorinating agent, together with ammonia, to a combustion
4
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007