Appeal No. 2003-0470
Application 09/671,870
for the first time, attempts to elaborate on why the noise
suppressor as seen in Paulson would “inherently” perform the
steps of appellant’s method as set forth in the claims on
appeal, and makes reference to six patents and two textbooks
to support such inherency positions.
Even if we were to agree with the examiner that
free rotation of the turbine section blades (43) of the
turbofan wheel (34) of Paulson in the exhaust flow from the
turbojet engine (11) therein would inherently produce a
segregated flow including a plurality of rotating high
velocity, low density jets and a plurality of rotating low
pressure voids located closely adjacent the trailing edges
of the turbine section blades (43), we see no basis for the
examiner’s further conclusion that any flow around the tips
of fan blades (50) in the fan section (42) located outboard
of the ring (45) of the turbofan wheel (34) in Paulson would
provide a secondary flow of air which, under any set of
9
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007