Appeal No. 2005-2736 Παγε 3
Application No. 09/966,288
OPINION
In reaching our decision in this appeal, we have given careful consideration to
the appellant's specification and claims, to the applied prior art references, and to the
respective positions articulated by the appellants and the examiner. As a consequence
of our review, we make the determinations which follow.
The examiner has rejected the claims under 35 U.S.C. § 102(b) as being
anticipated by Tsubouchi. We initially note that a claim is anticipated only if each and
every element as set forth in the claim is found, either expressly or inherently described,
in a single prior art reference. Verdegaal Bros. Inc. v. Union Oil Co., 814 F.2d 628, 631,
2 USPQ2d 1051, 1053 (Fed. Cir.), cert. denied, 484 U.S. 827 (1987). The inquiry as to
whether a reference anticipates a claim must focus on what subject matter is
encompassed by the claim and what subject matter is described by the reference.
The examiner finds that Tsubouchi describes the invention as claimed. In regard
to the recitation in claims 39 and 40 of an avoiding means and avoiding portions
respectively, the examiner states:
. . . By definition, nozzles comprise divergent cross sections at the outlet
side thereof. The nozzles 41-45 in fuel supply plate changer 3, inherently
each having a divergent cross section is read as "avoiding means" or
"avoiding portions" [answer at page 3].
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007