Appeal No. 2007-0175 Page 10
Application No. 10/467,134
The combination of Binot, Vion and Oyler:
Claims 21 and 22 stand rejected under 35 USC §103(a) as being
unpatentable over the combination of Binot, Vion and Oyler.
Claim 21 ultimately depends from and further limits claim 18 to include the
step of at least partially removing grit from the water or wastewater utilizing a
coarse grit removal device upstream from the coagulation, flocculation and
sediment devices and operating the coarse grit removal device at a settling
speed of more than 15 m/h. Claim 22 depends from and further limits the coarse
grit removal device of claim 21, by requiring that the device operate at a settling
speed between 80 and 200 m/h.
The examiner relies on the combination of Binot and Vion as set forth
above. Final Rejection, page 3. The examiner recognizes, however, that the
combination of Binot and Vion differs from appellant’s claimed invention “by
reciting that the grit removal device is operated at a specific speed.” The
examiner relies on Oyler to make up for this deficiency in the combination of
Binot and Vion. In this regard, the examiner finds (id.) Oyler disclose “that it is
known in the art to adjust the speed of a rotor in a vortex grit removal device, to
aid in maximizing grit removal.”
Based on this evidence the examiner reasons (id.) “[i]t would have been
obvious to one skilled in the art to modify the references applied above by
operating the device at the recited speed in view of the teachings of Oyler, [in
order] to maximize the removal of grit from the wastewater.” According to the
examiner, “[t]he specific speed utilized, would have been an obvious matter of
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Next
Last modified: September 9, 2013