Appeal No. 2004-1456 Page 6
Application No. 09/624,151
systems discussed in appellants’ specification using heat pipes to transport heat from
the payload to the radiator panels, the solar loaded surfaces (east, west, earth and aft)
are not effective as heat radiating surfaces because the temperatures of these surfaces
approach or exceed the temperature of the payload due to high relative solar loading,
thus preventing effective heat transfer from the payload to the radiating surfaces via a
heat pipe system. Such a person would also have inferred from the above-quoted
disclosure on page 2 of appellants’ specification that appellants contemplated the use of
a heat pump system to elevate the temperature of the heat transfer fluid above that of
the solar loaded east, west, earth and aft surfaces, thereby enabling them to be
effectively used as radiating surfaces.
For the above reasons, we conclude that appellants’ specification as originally
filed is sufficient to provide written description support for the limitation in claim 24
regarding the elevation of the fluid medium temperature to above that of the at least one
solar loaded surface. The examiner’s rejection under the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. §
112 thus cannot be sustained on this basis.
The remainder of the examiner’s bases for determining that appellants’
specification fails to provide written description support for the subject matter in
appellants’ claims appear to stem from the examiner’s false impression that the
specification provides no disclosure of using a solar loaded surface as a heat radiating
surface. On the contrary, appellants’ specification clearly states in the last paragraph
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007