Ex parte HOYT - Page 3

          Appeal No. 96-1596                                                          
          Application No. 08/106,489                                                  

               In reaching our decision in this appeal, we have given                 
          careful consideration to the appellant's specification and                  
          claims, to the applied prior art reference, and to the respective           
          positions articulated by the appellant and the examiner.  As a              
          consequence of our review, we make the determinations which                 

               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.  As set forth by the court            
          in Kalman v. Kimberly-Clark Corp., 713 F.2d 760, 772, 218 USPQ              
          781, 789 (Fed. Cir. 1983), cert. denied, 465 U.S. 1026 (1984), it           
          is only necessary for the claims to "'read on' something                    
          disclosed in the reference, i.e., all limitations of the claim              
          are found in the reference, or 'fully met' by it."                          


Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  Next 

Last modified: November 3, 2007