Appeal No. 2006-1998
Application No. 10/215,648
It is clear that the cooling air provided in Jackson comes from the fan trays 140.
So, although the examiner may be correct in asserting that a plenum chamber is formed in
Jackson by the side panels 118, 120, since air will flow between the side panels and the
processing units, the claims (e.g., claim 11) require the cooling air to “flow from the front
face of the enclosure…” The air in Jackson flows “from” the fan trays 140, and not
“from the front face of the enclosure,” as claimed.
Therefore, we will not sustain the rejection of claims 11, 12, and 26-28 under
§102 (e).
Claim 30, per se, does not indicate the direction of the cooling air flow but it
depends from claim 29 which does require a “flow of cooling air in a direction
substantially from the face of the module…”
Accordingly, we will not sustain the rejection of claims 29 and 30 under §102 (e).
CONCLUSION
We have sustained the rejection of claims 1, 2, 4, 5, 7-10, 13-16, 18-25, 31, and
32 under §102 (e) but we have not sustained the rejection of claims 3, 6, 11, 12, 17, and
26-30 under §102 (e).
Accordingly, the examiner’s decision is affirmed-in-part.
5
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007