Appeal No. 95-1872
Application 07/953,340
Travenol Labs., 952 F.2d 388, 390, 21 USPQ2d 1281, 1283 (Fed. Cir. 1991) citing In re Bond, 910
F.2d 831, 833, 15 USPQ2d 1566, 1567 (Fed. Cir. 1990). Anticipation requires prior art to describe,
either expressly or under the principles of inherency, each and every element set forth in the claims. See
RCA Corp. v. Applied Digital Data Sys., Inc., 730 F.2d 1440, 1444, 221 USPQ 385, 388 (Fed. Cir.
1984). For reasons already stated, supra, the examiner has not established that the polymer particles of
Stangroom are beads having an electro-rheological constituent entrapped therein. Moreover the examiner
has not shown that each of Stangroom’s polymeric particles forms a network of pores having a calculated
cross-linking density in excess of 10% as required by appellant’s claims. Nor has the examiner shown that
the polymeric particulate disclosed in Stangroom is 20-50% by weight of the electro-rheological fluid
composition. Accordingly, we find that examiner’s rejection falls short of making out a prima facie case
of anticipation.
For the foregoing reasons, the examiner’s rejections under 35 U.S.C. § 112 and 102(b) are
reversed.
REVERSED
BRADLEY R. GARRIS )
Administrative Patent Judge )
)
) BOARD OF PATENT
) APPEALS AND
CAMERON WEIFFENBACH ) INTERFERENCES
9
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007