Appeal No. 1999-0482
Application 08/632,331
element of the claim. See In re King, 801 F.2d 1324, 1326,
231 USPQ 136, 138 (Fed. Cir. 1986) and Lindemann
Maschinenfabrik GMBH v. American Hoist & Derrick Co., 730 F.2d
1452, 1458, 221 USPQ 481, 485 (Fed. Cir. 1984). "Anticipation
is established only when a single prior art reference
discloses, expressly or under principles of inherency, each
and every element of a claimed invention." RCA Corp. v.
Applied Digital Data Sys., Inc., 730 F.2d 1440, 1444, 221 USPQ
385, 388 (Fed. Cir.), cert. dismissed, 468 U.S. 1228 (1984),
citing Kalman v. Kimberly-Clark Corp., 713 F.2d 760, 772, 218
USPQ 781, 789 (Fed. Cir. 1983), cert. denied, 465 U.S. 1026
(1984).
The Examiner maintains in the final rejection that the
queue shown in Hower’s figure 1 as element 42 reads on
Appellant’s claimed “spooler program stored in the folder that
is associated with the designated printer.” Appellant argues
on pages 6 through 8 that Hower’s queue is not an executable
program. Appellant argues that the spooler program as claimed
is a program which prepares a file for printing and in
contrast the queue for Hower merely comprises area for storing
4
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007