Appeal No. 1999-2364
Application No. 08/562,816
(3) Claim 4, unpatentable over North in view of Schuetze, Hoss
and Gershman, under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a);
(4) Claims 6, 9, 13 to 15 and 17, unpatentable over North in
view of Young, under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a);
(5) Claims 8 and 12, unpatentable over North in view of
Gershman, under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a);
(6) Claim 16, unpatentable over North in view of Young,
Schuetze, Hoss and Gershman, under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a);
(7) Claim 21, unpatentable over North in view of Schuetze,
Hoss and Young, under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a).
(8) Claims 11 and 12, unpatentable over Chapuis, under 35
U.S.C. § 103(a).
Rejection (1)
In order to anticipate claim 1, North must disclose every
limitation of that claim, either explicitly or inherently. In
re Schreiber, 128 F.3d 1473, 1477, 44 USPQ2d 1429, 1431 (Fed.
Cir. 1997). Appellant first argues that the width of North’s
bottom sheet 1 is not "at least about 50% greater" than the
width of top sheet 2, as claimed. North does not disclose any
specific dimensions, but from measuring the sheets shown in
Fig. 3, appellant calculates that the bottom sheet is 41%
3
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007