Appeal No. 1998-0578
Application 08/349,633
classified as waste hazardous materials;
and
said first and second data
representing said containers of in-use
hazardous materials and waste hazardous
materials being designated as pure
hazardous materials, as the trade names of
the hazardous material, as a preset mixture
of hazardous materials, or as a variable
mix of hazardous materials so as to enable
such system to track each container of
hazardous material in any one of said
designations from its beginning as an in-
use hazardous material through its disposal
as a waste hazardous material.
Opinion
The rejection of claims 21, 22 and 38 under 35 U.S.C.
§ 102(e) as being anticipated by Stanczyk cannot be sustained.
A reversal of the rejection on appeal should not be
construed as an affirmative indication that the appellants’
claims are patentable over prior art. We address only the
positions and rationale as set forth by the examiner and on
which the examiner’s rejection of the claims on appeal is
based.
Anticipation is established only when a single prior art
reference discloses, either expressly or under the principles
of inherency, each and every element of the claimed invention.
3
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007