Appeal No. 99-0031
Application 08/639,737
20b. Securement means 12, 14, and 16 could
be secured to only the adjustment strap of
a cap. This would be especially true if
the cap was a relatively large cap with a
relatively large adjustment strap and if
the securement means 12, 14, and 16 were
pushed together. . . .
. . . .
The securement means 12, 14, and 16 [of]
Nieves-Rivera could clearly be secured to
the adjustment strap of a relatively large
size adjustment means if the securement
means 12, 14, and 16 were pushed together.
Further, the connector portion and shield
20a and 20b could [be] folded into and worn
on the inside of a relatively large cap.
After fully considering the record in light of the
arguments presented by appellant in the brief and reply brief,
and by the examiner in the answer, we conclude that claim 1 is
not anticipated by Nieves-Rivera.
"To anticipate a claim, a prior art reference must
disclose every limitation of the claimed invention, either
explicitly or inherently." In re Schreiber, 128 F.3d 1473,
1477, 44 USPQ2d 1429, 1431 (Fed. Cir. 1997). Although an
element may be defined functionally, i.e., by what it does, it
is anticipated if the prior art structure inherently possesses
3
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007