Appeal No. 97-1476 Page 8
Application No. 08/458,689
Maasbach's teachings of utilizing cord 2 to easily tighten the
bag 6 to the shrub 15 as shown in Figure 6.
We agree with the appellant's argument (brief, pp. 6-8)
that there is no teaching, suggestion or motivation for
combining Maasbach's teaching with Hawkins's plant receptacle
absent impressible hindsight.
Furthermore, it is our view that cord 2 of Maasbach or
the string-like member 2 of Takahisa are not equivalent to the
cable ties disclosed by the appellant. In order to meet a
"means-plus-function" limitation, the prior art must (1)
perform the identical function recited in the means limitation
and
(2) perform that function using the structure disclosed in the
specification or an equivalent structure. Cf. Carroll Touch
Inc. v. Electro Mechanical Sys. Inc., 15 F.3d 1573, 1578, 27
USPQ2d 1836, 1840 (Fed. Cir. 1994); Valmont Indus. Inc. v.
Reinke Mfg. Co., 983 F.2d 1039, 1042, 25 USPQ2d 1451, 1454
(Fed. Cir. 1993); Johnston v. IVAC Corp., 885 F.2d 1574, 1580,
12 USPQ2d 1382, 1386 (Fed. Cir. 1989). In this case, the
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007