Appeal 2007-2483
Application 09/899,183
Mitsubishi wishes) is adjacent to the plate as "adjacent" is used in the art.
Thus, the missing modification is the physical contact between Li's cooling
jacket and some part of the nozzle.
Why modify Li to permit physical contact between the nozzle (the
contents of which must remain cool) and the cooling jacket? The question
begs the answer. The efficiency of the cooling jacket could only be
enhanced by physical contact, which would permit among other things
cooling by conduction. Might there be trade-offs? Even the unskilled would
appreciate that physical contact to the extent that it interferes significantly
with Li's curtain gases should be avoided. If there are other problems arising
from direct contact, Mitsubishi's specification provides no guidance about
them. Thus, any problems or trade-offs that may exist are within the skill of
the art to recognize and resolve.
CONCLUSION
The subject matter of claim 15 would have been obvious to a person
having ordinary skill in the art in view of the Li and Zhao patents. The other
claims stand or fall with claim 15. Consequently, the rejection of claims 15-
18 is—
AFFIRMED
VW
Jeffrey A. Wyand
LEYDIG VOIT & MAYER, LTD
700 Thirteenth St. NW, Suite 300
Washington, DC 20005-3960
13
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13
Last modified: September 9, 2013