Appeal No. 1998-1478
Application No. 08/517,604
surface and the side surface, as seen in Figure 1, and thus
are not exactly vertical or horizontal. Therefore, although
the plan view of the pole pieces 24 and 24 , as shown in1 2
Figure 2, appears as a straight line, the pole pieces
themselves are not straight on any side. Accordingly, APA
fails to meet the limitation of the pole pieces being
constituted by two straight bars.
"It is axiomatic that anticipation of a claim under § 102
can be found only if the prior art reference discloses every
element of the claim." In re King, 801 F.2d 1324, 1326, 231
USPQ 136, 138 (Fed. Cir. 1986). See also Lindemann
Maschinenfabrik GMBH v. American Hoist & Derrick Co., 730 F.2d
1452, 1458, 221 USPQ 481, 485 (Fed. Cir. 1984). As detailed
above, APA fails to meet every limitation of the claim without
interpreting the terminology thereof in a manner that is
unreasonable and contrary to its normal usage. Consequently,
we cannot sustain the anticipation rejection of claim 2.
8
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007