Appeal No. 2003-1549
Application No. 09/356,400
introducing a second reaction medium through nozzle apertures
at a multiplicity of locations distributed about a cross section of
the flow channel into the first reaction medium;
and
causing reduced pressures and inducing turbulence flows with a
multiplicity of deflectors in the first reaction medium at the
locations at which the second reaction medium is introduced and
thereby intensely intermixing the first and second reaction media
directly at the locations at which the second reaction medium is
introduced.
The prior art references relied upon by the examiner are:
Tenner et al. (Tenner) 4,115,515 Sep. 19, 1978
Mansour et al. (Mansour) 5,510,092 Apr. 23, 1996
Claims 1 through 4 and 14 through 17 stand rejected under 35
U.S.C. § 103 as unpatentable over the combined disclosures of
Mansour and Tenner.
We reverse.
On this record, we concur with the appellants that the
examiner has not supplied sufficient suggestion or motivation to
arrive at the claimed subject matter within the meaning of 35
U.S.C. § 103. Specifically, the examiner has not explained or
shown that one of ordinary skill in the art would have been led to
employ the nozzle arrangement taught by Tenner to introduce a
second reaction medium at the locations where multiple deflectors
are placed to cause reduced pressure and induce turbulence flows.
See the Answer in its entirety. As correctly noted by the
2
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007