Appeal No. 2004-0536
Application No. 09/823,072
the examiner that the claimed subject matter would have been
obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art within the meaning of
§ 103 in view of the applied prior art. Accordingly, we will
sustain the examiner's rejection.
Basuthakur and Hosick, like appellants, disclose a
spacecraft having east and west facing body panels, as well as
the use of heat pipes to withdraw heat from the panels when they
are exposed to the sun. The heat pipes of Basuthakur are coupled
to the panels and "a point within or on a surface of satellite
body 32 which has special thermal stability requirements"
(column 5, lines 49-50). Basuthakur does not specifically
disclose coupling the east and west facing panels with the heat
pipes. Hosick, however, like appellants, expressly teaches
implementing a heat transferring means, such as heat pipes 40,
between the east and west facing panels 28 and 30 for the purpose
of minimizing temperature variations on the panels during
exposure to direct sunlight (see column 4, lines 55 et seq. and
column 6, lines 5 et. seq.). Accordingly, based on the prior art
disclosures, we are convinced that the examiner properly
concluded that it would have been obvious for one of ordinary
skill in the art to dispose one or more heat pipes on the east
-3-
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007