Ex Parte MA - Page 2




            Appeal No. 2003-0659                                                                       
            Application 09/463,540                                                                     


            Claim 1, directed toward the method, is illustrative:                                      
                  1.    A method of purging a lean NOx trap that has a matrix                          
            (16) of narrow flow passages and is arranged in the exhaust                                
            system of a lean burn engine, the method comprising the steps of                           
            providing a flow straightening matrix (12) of narrow flow                                  
            passages preceding the NOx trap matrix (16) and separated from                             
            the NOx trap matrix by a narrow chamber (14), and periodically                             
            injecting reducing gases in bursts into the narrow chamber (14),                           
            each burst having sufficient mass and flow rate to fill the                                
            narrow chamber (14) with the reducing gases and to displace the                            
            exhaust gases previously present in the narrow chamber (14) into                           
            the narrow flow passages of the flow straightening matrix (12)                             
            and of the trap (16) without significantly mixing with the                                 
            exhaust gases previously present in the narrow chamber.                                    
                                           THE REFERENCES                                              
            Alcorn                           4,912,776        Mar. 27, 1990                            
            Martin et al. (Martin)           6,003,305        Dec. 21, 1999                            
            (filed Sep.  2, 1997)                                                                      
            Hartweg et al. (Hartweg)         6,004,520        Dec. 21, 1999                            
            (filed Dec. 12, 1996)                                                                      
                                           THE REJECTIONS                                              
                  The claims stand rejected as follows: claims 1, 2 and 10                             
            under 35 U.S.C. § 102(e) as anticipated by Alcorn or Hartweg, and                          
            claims 1-16 under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as obvious over Hartweg in view                          
            of Martin, or over Martin in view of Alcorn.                                               
                                               OPINION                                                 
                  We reverse the aforementioned rejections.                                            
                       Rejection under 35 U.S.C. § 102(e) over Alcorn                                  
                  “Anticipation requires that every limitation of the claim in                         
                                                  2                                                    





Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  Next 

Last modified: November 3, 2007