Appeal No. 97-1974
Application 08/286,696
with respect to a base (brief, pages 20 to 21).
In order to anticipate a claim, a reference must disclose
every limitation of the claimed invention, either explicitly
or inherently. In re Schreiber, 128 F.3d 1473, 1477, 44
USPQ2d 1429, 1431 (Fed. Cir. 1997). With regard to
appellants' arguments (1) and (3), the examiner takes the
position that the "base" recited in claim 4 is readable on the
wall on which Minnick's holder is mounted. We consider this
position to be well taken. During patent examination, the
pending claims are to be interpreted as broadly as their terms
reasonable allow, In re Zletz, 893 F.2d 319, 321, 13 USPQ2d
1320, 1322 (Fed. Cir. 1989), and limitations from the
specification are not to be read into the claims. Sjolund v.
Musland, 847 F.2d 1573, 1581, 6 USPQ2d 2020, 2027 (Fed. Cir.
1988). Contrary to appellants' arguments, claim 4 does not
recite a base between the holder and support structure, but
simply recites that the holder is "adapted to be mounted to a
base" and has a "means fastened to said vertical member and
movable with respect to said base for adjusting the saucer
holder with respect to said base". Giving "base" its
9
Page: Previous 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007