Appeal No. 2006-1425
Application No. 10/277,260
maintenance time
or outage as mere
determining a pre-
determined engine
lubricant value
using other
equivalent engine
operation
parameter or
period, absent
evidence of
unexpected results
[answer at page 6].
Appellants argue that the cited prior art does not disclose subject matter
that is recited in claim 1, i.e:
Using the at least one quality parameter to determine a
replacement quantity of lubricant less than all of the lubricant
in the engine that must be removed from the engine and
replaced with fresh lubricant in order to maintain a desired
engine lubricant quality parameter.
We agree with the appellants that the combined teachings of the cited prior art do
not describe a method that includes determining the quantity of lubricant that must be
removed from the engine and replaced with fresh lubricant in order to maintain the
desired lubricant quality parameter. AAPA describes replacing all of the lubricant to
maintain a measured lubricant quality (specification at page 2). Boyle describes
removing a predetermined amount of lubricant from the engine and making a
4
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Next
Last modified: September 9, 2013