Appeal No. 95-5059
Application 08/157,872
1697, 1701 (Fed. Cir. 1995), cert. denied, 116 S.Ct. 1362 (1996),
quoting from In re LeGrice, 301 F.2d 929, 936, 133 USPQ 365, 372
(CCPA 1962).
According to the examiner, Daimler Benz discloses a fender
flare extension unit “having an inner edge 15 which generally1
conforms to the shape of the wheel opening; [and] an outer edge
15 " (Paper No. 11, page 2). All of the other components of the2
body extension as defined by claim 1 are located between these
two landmarks. This means that in order for claim 1 to be
anticipated by Daimler Benz, the “exposed” contour of the claimed
device, that is, the “protuberant region,” the “shoulder region,”
the “reverse-turned region” and “a nonprotuberant border flange
region,” all must be found in portion 14 of the disclosed device,
which is pictured in several embodiments in Figures 2, 3 and 4.
The examiner has described how he reads the various portions on
the Daimler Benz device on page 3 of the Answer. Because of how
the examiner is reading the claimed structure on the reference,
we find some deficiencies, which cause us not to sustain the
Section 102 rejection of claims 1 through 3.
Claim 1 requires an inner edge, which the examiner reads on
the lower of the two edges 15 of Daimler Benz, and an outer edge,
which he reads on the upper one of the edges 15. According to
4
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007