Appeal No. 2003-1491 Page 7
Application No. 09/473,834
Our determination
In our view, the subject matter of claim 5 is not anticipated by Robertson for the
reasons set forth by the appellant in the briefs before us in this appeal. To anticipate a
claim, a prior art reference must disclose every limitation of the claimed invention, either
explicitly or inherently. In re Schreiber, 128 F.3d 1473, 1477, 44 USPQ2d 1429, 1431
(Fed. Cir. 1997). In this case, the claimed step of "continuing to dispense the contents
of said tube by applying finger pressure on said folded portion" as set forth in claim 5 is
not disclosed in Robertson. In Robertson, the contents of the tube are continued to be
dispensed by applying finger pressure on the tube above the folded portion and the
retaining device, not to the folded portion as claimed.
Since all the limitations of independent claim 5 are not disclosed in Robertson for
the reasons set forth above, the decision of the examiner to reject claim 5, and claims 6
to 8 dependent thereon, under 35 U.S.C. § 102(b) is reversed.
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007