Appeal No. 1998-0578
Application 08/349,633
In re Spada, 911 F.2d 705, 707, 15 USPQ2d 1655, 1657 (Fed.
Cir. 1990); RCA Corp. v. Applied Digital Data Sys., Inc., 730
F.2d 1440, 1444, 221 USPQ 385, 388 (Fed. Cir. 1984). See also
In re
King, 801 F.2d 1324, 1326, 231 USPQ 136, 138 (Fed. Cir. 1986);
Lindemann Maschinenfabrik GMBH v. American Hoist & Derrick
Co., 730 F.2d 1452, 1458, 221 USPQ 481, 485 (Fed. Cir. 1984).
The prior art reference must either expressly or inherently
describe each and every limitation in a claim. Verdegaal
Bros. v. Union Oil Co., 814 F.2d 628, 631, 2 USPQ2d 1051, 1053
(Fed. Cir.), cert. denied, 484 U.S. 827 (1987).
Claim 21 recites a data storage device having information
for access by users through an input device coupled to a
computer. The data storage device stores a particular
“hazardous material container classification system” which
includes a first type of data and a second type of data. The
first data represent “containers storing hazardous materials
that are in use,” and the second data represent “containers
storing hazardous materials that are classified as waste
hazardous materials.” Further according to claim 21, both the
first and second data are designated as either (1) pure
4
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007