Appeal No. 94-2716
Application 07/764,775
OPINION
We reverse.
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 & Assocs.
v. Garlock, Inc., 721 F.2d 1540, 1544, 220 USPQ 303, 313 (Fed.
Cir. 1983), cert. denied, 469 U.S. 851 (1984).
The focus of the dispute between the examiner and the
appellant is the functional language in the last clause of claim
1 on appeal. As best set forth in the second supplemental
answer, we agree with the examiner=s position that the
corresponding guide rods in Figure 3 of Fujita are sufficiently
rigid to position the structural body and the cover in a
substantially fixed relationship with respect to each other.
However, we disagree with examiner=s urging that the claimed
feature of the slender members being Asufficiently flexible to be
elastically deformable to dampen shocks when shocks are applied
thereto@ is met by Fujita.
3
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007