Appeal No. 2003-1463 Page 3
Application No. 09/536,341
(Paper No. 17) for the examiner's complete reasoning in support of the rejections and to
the brief and reply brief (Paper Nos. 15 and 19) for the appellants’ arguments
thereagainst.
OPINION
In reaching our decision in this appeal, we have given careful consideration to
the appellants’ specification and claims, to the applied prior art references, and to the
respective positions articulated by the appellants and the examiner. As a consequence
of our review, we make the determinations which follow.
The anticipation rejection
Babka discloses an oil atomizer comprising a pipe 15 through which oil is
delivered to a burner nozzle 1, the pipe 15 being provided with a goose neck extension
16 on the downstream end thereof. The burner nozzle is formed by a rear cup 5 and a
front cup 6, each comprising a series of projecting rings or annular flanges 8-10 and 11-
14, respectively, forming a series of interconnected annular spaces between the two
cups through which the oil flows. As oil is delivered through the pipe 15 it is discharged
into the inner surface of an inner ring 7 on the rear cup 5 where it has imparted to it a
rotational velocity which causes it to spread to a film and from which it escapes through
slots 17 and strikes flange 11. The oil spreads in a film and flows toward and over the
curved surface of the flange 11 until it is discharged off the edge onto the next flange 8.
The direction of flow of the oil is then reversed and the oil flows over the surface of the
flange 8 toward the front until it is discharged onto the next flange 12 and so on.
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007