Ex Parte YAMAUCHI et al - Page 2



          Appeal No. 2002-1102                                                        
          Application No. 09/329,591                                                  
          appellants state that they “hereby cancel Claim 20.”1  We will              
          treat this statement as a withdrawal of claim 20 from the subject           
          appeal.  As a consequence, only claims 10 and 13-17 remain before           
          us on this appeal.                                                          
               The subject matter on appeal relates to a PCB decomposing              
          apparatus comprising a primary reactor, a secondary reactor, pH             
          detecting means, sodium hydroxide supply means and control means            
          for controlling an amount of sodium hydroxide to be supplied                
          corresponding to a pH value detected by the pH detecting means.             
          Further details of this appealed subject matter are set forth in            
          representative independent claim 10 which reads as follows:                 
               10. A PCB decomposing apparatus comprising:                            
               a PCB extracting container for extracting PCB from a PCB               
          containing material with an organic solvent;                                
               a distilling tower for distilling an extracted solution                
          introduced from the PCB extracting container, thereby separating            
          the PCB from the organic solvent;                                           
               a primary reactor including a container for receiving a PCB-           
          containing fluid separated from the distilling tower, a nozzle              
          for introducing aqueous sodium carbonate solution into the                  
          container for decomposing the PCB, and a nozzle for introducing             
          an oxidizing agent;                                                         

               1                                                                      
               1 This attempt by the appellants to cancel claim 20 has not            
          been effective since the claim cancellation should have been                
          filed as a separate paper rather than as part of the brief.  See            
          37 CFR § 1.4(c)(2001).  Also see the Manual of Patent Examining             
          Procedure (MPEP) § 1207 (8th ed., Aug. 2001).                               
                                          2                                           




Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  Next 

Last modified: November 3, 2007