Appeal 2007-4230
Application 09/984,339
process including the aforementioned step of setting the steam/hydrocarbon
mixing ratio as a function of a temperature of a reformate gas stream
emerging from a CO oxidation stage of the reforming reactor.
In making the assertions set forth in the Answer, the Examiner has
seemingly taken at least some of the applied references’ disclosures out of
context without providing persuasive reasoning to support the contention
that the combination of the CO reaction method of Heil with the reforming
method of Wiesheu would have led one of ordinary skill in the art to the here
claimed subject matter.
In other words, the Examiner’s rationale for the rejection falls short of
identifying “a reason that would have prompted a person of ordinary skill in
the art to combine the elements” in the manner claimed. KSR Int’l Co. v.
Teleflex, Inc., 127 S. Ct. 1727, 1731, 82 USPQ2d 1385, 1389 (2007).
CONCLUSION
The decision of the Examiner to reject claims 1 and 3 under 35 U.S.C.
§ 103(a) as being unpatentable over Wiesheu in view of Heil is reversed.
REVERSED
cam
6
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Next
Last modified: September 9, 2013