Appeal 2007-0492
Application 10/810,960
1 2. Have Appellants shown that Ito does not disclose pressuring a supply of
2 fuel with the oxygen depleted stream from an oxygen-enrichment assembly?
3 C. Findings of Fact
4 The following findings of fact, as well as any others set out in this opinion are
5 supported by a preponderance of the evidence of record.
6 1. Appellants have appealed the rejection of claims 1–3, 6–10, 13, 16, 19, 20, 27–29,
7 31, 33–362, and 44–68, which are all the pending claims of the 10/810,960 application.
8 (Appeal Brief filed 27 April 2006 ("Brief") at 2, 2d full paragraph.)
9 THE PRIOR ART
10 2. The Examiner relies on the following prior art in the rejections of the claimed
11 subject matter on appeal:
12 St-Pierre et al. U.S. 6,627,338 B2 30 Sept 2003
13 Appleby et al. U.S. 2001/0026884 4 Oct 2001
14 Okamoto U.S. 6,045,933 4 April 2000
15 Blomen et al. Fuel Cell Systems 1993
16 Ito U.S. 4,509,915 9 April 1985
17 (Examiner's Answer mailed 13 July 2006 ("Answer") at 2.)
2 We do not find claim 36 listed in the statements of rejection in the
Final Rejection, but because the Appellants agree that it has been
rejected, we accept the Examiner's and Appellants' representations and
assume that the discrepancy will be addressed in any further
prosecution, if necessary.
-6-
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: September 9, 2013