Appeal 2007-3496
Application 10/344,472
the annular front wall 4 to form the start-up flame in reaction chamber 5,
which ignites the main burner (de Haan, e.g., col. 2, l. 46, to col. 3, l. 5, and
col. 4, ll. 37-60). We find no disclosure in de Haan which provides a
teaching or inference that ignition electrode 8 and infrared detector 30 detect
a flame in other than their respective spaces.
On this record, we agree with Appellants that the teachings and
inferences one of ordinary skill in this art would have found in de Haan do
not support the Examiner’s position. Like Appellants, we determine one of
ordinary skill in the art would have found that during burner operation, the
pilot flame and the small flame sweep over and cover ignition electrode 8
and are thus detected by the ignition electrode in the annular space, and that
the infrared radiation detector 30, in detecting the intensity of the light
emitted by the flame formed in the reactor by gases from nozzles 22,23 on
annular front wall 4, would not function to monitor the flame sweeping over
the ignition electrode in the annular space.
Thus, the Examiner has not established a prima facie case of
obviousness over the combined teachings of de Haan and Sebastiani, and
accordingly, we reverse the ground of rejection under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a).
The Primary Examiner’s decision is reversed.
REVERSED
tf/ls
Honeywell International Inc.
101 Columbia Road
P.O. Box 2245
Morristown, NJ 07962-2245
6
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6
Last modified: September 9, 2013