Appeal No. 95-3538
Application 08/108,356
We do not sustain the rejection of claims 1-20 as being
anticipated by Ando.
Anticipation is established only when a single prior art
reference discloses, either expressly or under the principles of
inherency, each and every element of the claimed invention. In
re Spada, 911 F.2d 705, 708, 15 USPQ2d 1655, 1657 (Fed. Cir.
1990); RCA Corp. v. Applied Digital Data Sys., Inc., 730 F.2d
1440, 1444, 221 USPQ 385, 388 (Fed. Cir. 1984).
Here, all of the appellant’s independent claims expressly
require a quasi-complementary BiCMOS circuit. Although the term
"quasi-complementary BiCMOS" is not defined in the specification,
the appellant submits that it is a recognized term in the art and
has submitted a trade article in support of the contention.
Specifically, during examination and accompanying the response
dated August 15, 1994 (Paper No. 4), the appellant submitted a
copy of "Quasi-Complementary BICMOS for Sub-3-V Digital
Circuits," IEEE Journal of Solid State Circuits, Vol 26, No. 11,
Nov. 1991, pages 1708-1719 (hereinafter the "IEEE article").
In the IEEE article from column 1, line 32 to column 2, line
4, quasi-complementary BiCMOS is defined as "[a] BiCMOS circuit
that discharges output loads through a composite circuit of pMOS
and n-p-n. . . ." In the context of Figure 1(b), the IEEE
4
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007