Appeal No. 2003-0671 Page 2
Application No. 09/099,632
BACKGROUND
The appellants’ invention relates to a heat exchanger. An understanding of the
invention can be derived from a reading of exemplary claim 1, which has been
reproduced below.
The prior art references of record relied upon by the examiner in rejecting the
appealed claims are:
Rosman et al. (Rosman) 4,347,896 Sep. 7, 1982
Phillips et al. (Phillips) 4,894,709 Jan. 16, 1990
Schubert et al. (Schubert) 5,249,359 Oct. 5, 1993
Bae 5,771,964 Jun. 30, 1998
The following rejections stand under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a):
(1) Claims 1, 21, 31, 32 and 34 on the basis of Phillips.
(2) Claims 1, 21-23, 31, 32 and 34 on the basis of Bae.
(3) Claims 1-5, 9, 10, 12-23, 31, 32 and 34 on the basis of Rosman in view of Bae.
(4) Claims 14 and 24 on the basis of Rosman in view of Bae and Schubert.
Rather than reiterate the conflicting viewpoints advanced by the examiner and
the appellants regarding the above-noted rejections, we make reference to the Answer
(Paper No. 27) for the examiner's complete reasoning in support of the rejections, and
to the Brief (Paper No. 26) and Reply Brief (Paper No. 28) for the appellants arguments
thereagainst.
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007