Appeal No. 2006-1744
Application No. 10/060,121
Yamazaki discloses “an evaporative fuel processing device for suppressing the
release of evaporative fuel from a fuel tank during refueling with a refueling nozzle” (col.
1, lines 7-10). The device includes a float valve (26) in communication with the vapor
dome of the tank, and an evaporative fuel passage (23a, 55) between the float valve
and a refueling line (22) (col. 3, lines 44-58; col. 4, lines 8-20; figure 1).
Aubel discloses a motor vehicle fuel vapor recovery system having a fuel nozzle
seal (24) (col. 3, lines 59-63; figure 3).
Hashimoto discloses a filler tube (3) having a neck portion in a closely fitting
arrangement with a nozzle (N) (col. 5, line 12; figure 4).
The appellant argues that at column 9, lines 7-9 Yamazaki explicitly recognizes
that generating fuel vapor requires drawing fresh air into a filler tube during refueling,
and that adding Aubel’s seal to Yamazaki’s nozzle would prevent fresh air from being
drawn in, causing the rushing fuel to pull the limited amount of air below the seal toward
the tank and create a vacuum at the nozzle tip, thereby shutting off the nozzle
prematurely (brief, page 4; reply brief, page 2). The portion of Yamazaki relied upon by
the appellant states that “[e]vaporative fuel newly generated in the tank body 21 is
increased in accordance with an increase of fresh air attendant with a decrease of
evaporative fuel circulated.” That portion does not state that air is desirable or is to be
increased. Yamazaki discloses connecting evaporative fuel passage 273 at a location
nearer the tank body than a shutter (57) that appears to be comparable to the
appellant’s seal (col. 9, lines 48-54; figure 9). Moreover, the appellant acknowledges
that it was known in the art to attach a vapor recirculation line to a nozzle downstream
3
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007