Appeal No. 2003-0659
Application 09/463,540
as a sort of mixing chamber” (col. 3, lines 42-45).
The examiner argues that Hartweg’s chambers 8 and 8' are
narrow and that Hartweg periodically injects reducing gases in
bursts into these chambers (answer, page 4). Hartweg, however,
does not disclose that spaces 8 and 8' are narrow or that the
reducing agent is injected in bursts. Hartweg merely discloses
is that the reducing agent flows into spaces 8 and 8' (col. 3,
line 42).
The examiner argues that Hartweg’s reducing agent fills
spaces 8 and 8' and displaces the exhaust gases previously
present in those spaces without significantly mixing with the
exhaust gases (answer, pages 4 and 9). Hartweg’s teaching that
“[t]he reducing agent flows into the respective space 8 and 8'
and mixes with the already partially purified exhaust gas”
(col. 3, lines 42-43) indicates that the examiner’s
interpretation of the reference is incorrect.
Thus, the examiner has not established a prima facie case of
anticipation by Hartweg of the invention claimed in any of the
appellant’s claims.
Rejection under 35 U.S.C. § 103
over Martin in view of Alcorn
Martin discloses a flameless thermal oxidizer for
6
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007