Appeal No. 2005-0880 2
Application No. 09/963,815
(b) disposing a vent valve in the upper wall of the tank and
connecting a vapor vent line from the vent valve to a vapor
storage canister; and,
(c) connecting one end of a recirculation line to the filler
neck downstream of the mechanical seal and connecting an end
opposite the one end to the vapor vent line; and, forming a
liquid seal between the filler neck and the fuel discharged from
the nozzle during refueling and entraining recirculated vapor
into the tank.1
THE PRIOR ART
The prior art items relied on by the examiner to support the
final rejection are:
Allison 5,282,497 Feb. 1, 1994
The prior art fuel tank system shown and described in Figure 5 of
the drawings and on pages 3 and 4 in the specification of the
instant application (the admitted prior art).
THE REJECTION
Claims 1 through 11 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a)
as being unpatentable over the admitted prior art in view of
Allison.
1 The appellant’s counsel confirmed at the oral hearing that
the step in claim 1 of “forming a liquid seal between the filler
neck and the fuel discharged from the nozzle during refueling” is
not entirely accurate. Claims 4 and 8 contain similar
limitations. The underlying specification (see page 6) more
accurately describes the liquid seal as being formed between the
nozzle and the inner periphery of the neck, and we have so
construed the claim language in question for purposes of the
appeal. In the event of further prosecution, the appellant
should amend claims 1, 4 and 8 to conform with the descriptive
portion of the specification in this regard.
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007