Appeal No. 2004-1690
Application No. 10/223,901
metal foam being attached to a plenum within a radiant burner.
Hence, although the examiner states that "appellant discloses the
identical structure disclosed by Haack" (id.), the examiner has
not indicated a disclosure in Haack that illustrates an
attachment between the metal foam and a plenum within a radiant
burner, and no such disclosure is apparent to us. It seems that
the examiner fails to appreciate that appellants are claiming a
radiator element comprising a metal foam attached to a plenum
within a radiant burner, and not merely a metal foam, per se.
In conclusion, based on the foregoing, the examiner's
decision rejecting the appealed claims is reversed.
REVERSED
EDWARD C. KIMLIN )
Administrative Patent Judge )
)
)
)
)
PETER F. KRATZ ) BOARD OF PATENT
Administrative Patent Judge ) APPEALS AND
) INTERFERENCES
)
)
)
JEFFREY T. SMITH )
Administrative Patent Judge )
ECK:clm
-4-
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007