Appeal No. 2002-0364
Application No. 08/951,812
Claims 36-65 stand rejected under both 35 U.S.C. § 102, as
anticipated by Martin, and under 35 U.S.C. § 103, as unpatentable
over Rational Rose in view of C++.
Reference is made to the briefs and answer for the
respective positions of appellants and the examiner.
OPINION
We turn, first, to the examiner’s rejection of the claims
under 35 U.S.C. § 102.
Anticipation is established only when a single prior art
reference discloses, expressly or under the principles of
inherency, each and every element of a claimed invention as well
as disclosing structure which is capable of performing the
recited functional limitations. 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); W.L. Gore and
Assoc., Inc. v. Garlock, Inc., 721 F.2d 1540, 1554, 220 USPQ 303,
313 (Fed. Cir. 1983), cert. denied, 469 U.S. 851 (1984).
The examiner applies Martin as an anticipatory reference
against all of the instant claims. Martin is a textbook
comprising more than 400 pages. As for the specifics of the
-4-
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007