Appeal No. 2005-0070
Application No. 09/885,102
reasons expressed by appellants, we will not sustain the
examiner's rejections.
Concerning the § 102 rejections, the fatal flaw in the
examiner's position is that the examiner fails to point to any
description in the applied references of an ozone generator
wherein the gas flow passage is arranged to allow gas flow in a
direction transverse to the longitudinal direction of the
parallel grooves. The examiner concedes that the references are
silent with respect to the inlet and outlet ports of the
generator, but supports the § 102 rejections on the basis that
"an inlet and an outlet port would be inherently included in the
apparatus" (page 3 of Answer, paragraph four). However, while it
cannot be gainsaid that the generators of the prior art
inherently have inlet and outlet ports, the appealed claims call
for more, namely, an arrangement of the inlet and outlet ports
which produces a gas flow in a direction transverse to the
longitudinal direction of the parallel grooves in at least one of
the electrodes. Manifestly, there is nothing inherent in such an
arrangement.
The examiner also mistakenly states that "it has been within
the skill in the art that the manner of operation or functional
limitations would have insignificant patentable weight when an
-4-
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007