Appeal No. 97-3064
Application 08/235,332
such as to achieve longitudinal bending to a degree
causing the laterally curved strip to snap laterally
flat. [Reply brief, page 3.]
We are unpersuaded by the appellant’s arguments. A
prior art reference anticipates the subject matter of a claim
when that reference discloses every feature of the claimed
invention, either explicitly or inherently. See Hazani v.
Int’l Trade Comm’n, 126 F.3d 1473, 1477, 44 USPQ2d 1358, 1361
(Fed. Cir. 1997) and RCA Corp. v. Applied Digital Data Sys.,
Inc., 730 F.2d 1440, 1444, 221 USPQ 385, 388 (Fed. Cir. 1984).
If a prior art device inherently possesses the capability of
functioning in the manner claimed, anticipation exists
regardless of whether there was a recognition that it could be
used to perform the claimed function. See In re Schreiber,
128 F.3d 1473, 1477, 44 USPQ2d 1429, 1431-32 (Fed. Cir. 1997).
See also In re Spada, 911 F.2d 705, 708, 15 USPQ2d 1655, 1657
(Fed. Cir. 1990):
“The discovery of a new property or use of a
previously known composition, even when that
property and use are unobvious from prior art, can
not impart patentability to claims to the known
composition.”
Here, as the examiner has noted, Wittle discloses guide
5
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007