Appeal 2007-0280
Application 10/469,392
Examiner in this or a continuing application, the Examiner and Appellants
should consider the prior art showing the individual methods of reducing
NOx and N2O, and determine if the combination of methods would have
been obvious to one of ordinary skill in this art. As admitted by Appellants
(Specification 2:35-3:4), this combination of treatments for the joint
reduction of NOx and N2O “is particularly desirable for reasons of simplicity
and economics.” Furthermore, Appellants should cite the “literature”
sources supporting this statement (Specification 3:2-3).
SUMMARY
The decision of the Examiner is affirmed.
No time period for taking any subsequent action in connection with
this appeal may be extended under 37 C.F.R. § 1.136(a)(1)(iv)(2006).
AFFIRMED
hh
CONNOLLY BOVE LODGE & HUTZ, LLP
P.O. BOX 2207
WILMINGTON, DE 19899
8
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
Last modified: September 9, 2013