Appeal No. 2002-1316
Application No. 09/049,036
Accordingly, we shall not sustain the standing 35 U.S.C.
§ 103(a) rejection of independent claim 1 and dependent claims
through 4, 6, 8 and 9 as being unpatentable over Harada in view
of Hartwell.
II. The 35 U.S.C. § 102(b) rejection of claims 10 through 17
stand rejected under as being anticipated by Rostek
Rostek discloses an electromagnetic interference shielding
gasket for sealing discontinuities in electrical equipment
enclosures. The gasket 26 comprises a flexible magnetic strip
28, a flexible plastic foam strip 30, an adhesive film 32 bonding
the magnetic and foam strips to one another, a pliable conductive
metal strip 36 spirally wrapped around the magnetic and foam
strips, and a conductive adhesive 37 bonding the gasket to an
enclosure surface.
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. 1984). It is not necessary that the
reference teach what the subject application teaches, but only
that the claim read on something disclosed in the reference,
7
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007