Appeal No. 2003-0609
Application No. 09/497,844
Discussion
Looking first at the standing anticipation rejection of the
appealed claims, even if we accept the examiner’s position that
Stern’s disclosure amounts to a teaching of using the rectangular
shaped cross section bore of example 874 of Figure 47 in any of
Stern’s embodiments, including the Figures 31A-31B embodiment1, we
cannot support the rejection. More particularly, we cannot accept
the examiner’s conclusion that the claimed subject matter2 would
inherently result from implementing Stern’s rectangular cross
section bore concept in the Figure 31A-31B embodiment. In this
regard, it seems to us that there are a number of ways of
incorporating the rectangular cross section bore concept in the
Figure 31A-31B embodiment, including providing a straw member 616
in the Figure 31A-31B embodiment that corresponds in cross section
to element 874 of Figure 47 wherein the sidewalls are of nonuniform
1Although not stated in the answer, it would appear that any
consideration of Stern as an anticipatory reference would
necessitate utilizing the Figure 31A-31B embodiment as a starting
point since the Figure 31A-31B nozzle is the only embodiment that
includes an exit port that flares outward from the flow
restrictor to the nozzle exit end, as required by the last
paragraph of claim 12.
2That is, a nozzle that includes both a flow restrictor
having a rectangular shaped cross section and an exit port being
substantially rectangular in shape.
7
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007