Appeal No. 2005-2705 Παγε 4
Application No. 08/978,055
passages comprising an inlet for the inerting gas and an outlet for the excess gas and
the side wall of the connector being provided with a purge orifice.
In order to fill the gaps in the disclosures of Lewis and Westrick, the examiner
relies on the teachings of Lindberg directed to a fluid filling system for filling a tank, such
as a stationary fuel tank, without disturbing the sediment collected at the bottom of the
tank. Lindberg discloses passing a filling pipe 12 into entrance conduit 11 of the tank,
the lower portion of the pipe 12 being provided with a series of transverse slots 36
through which the fuel or other liquid with which the tank is to be filled exits from the
filling pipe. A slidable sealing fixture 17 is mounted near the upper end of the filling pipe
for partially sealing the upper edge of the entrance conduit 11. A closure valve 24 is
formed in the sidewall of the fixture 17. The closure valve 24 is normally closed at the
start of the filling operation and will remain closed if the tank being filled has a vent of its
own. If the tank has no vent, or if its vent is closed, the pressure within the tank will
open the valve 24 and permit air to escape.
Like the examiner, we appreciate that the teachings of Lindberg are not directed
exclusively to stationary fuel tanks. Nevertheless, as they are directed to the filling of
the tank and not to inerting of a tank or introduction of inerting gas into the tank, they
would have provided no suggestion to one of ordinary skill in the wine making art to
modify the structure of either Lewis or Westrick for inerting wine tanks so as to establish
a prima facie case of obviousness of the subject matter of claims 1 and 21. Thus, we
cannot sustain the rejection of independent claims 1 and 21, and claims 2, 3, 12, 13 and
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007