Appeal No. 2003-1529
Application No. 08/499,442
finds that the Matyear adsorption is operated under the same or
similar conditions to the claimed adsorption zone (see col. 3, ll.
4-23), thus inherently producing a mass transfer zone and an
equilibrium zone (Answer, pages 4-5).
The examiner also recognizes that Matyear does not
specifically disclose Q values within the claimed range (Answer,
page 5). However, the examiner concludes that it would have been
obvious to have modified the Matyear process by using an adsorption
zone with the claimed Q values since Matyear teaches use of alumina
and molecular sieve amounts within broad ranges (id., citing vessel
10 with a molecular sieve adsorbent between 1 and 10 inches or more
with the remainder of the column filled with alumina; see col. 2,
ll. 62-70). We agree.
Appellant argues that Matyear does not provide sufficient
information to allow even a hindsight calculation of a Q ratio, nor
does Matyear provide any motivation to suggest such a calculation
of Q (Brief, pages 14-15). This argument is not persuasive since
Matyear exemplifies a drying vessel 10 about 6 feet in diameter
and 20 feet high, disclosing that the amount of molecular sieve is
usually between about 1-10 inches or more in thickness (col. 2, ll.
62-70, italics added). Furthermore, Matyear specifically teaches
that “[i]t is possible for each drying operation to determine the
12
Page: Previous 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007