Appeal No. 95-2502
Application No. 07/763,625
results include the location of at least one of the deviations
with respect to the piecer.
In Raasch’s automatic spinner, the processing data for
the piecing operation admittedly includes the deviation of
thread diameter from a given diameter along a thread length
including the piecer. However, this reference fails to
expressly or inherently disclose the feature of determining
the locations of those deviations. For this reason alone, the
Raasch patent is not a proper anticipatory reference for the
subject matter of the appealed claims. Compare Kloster
Speedsteel AB v. Crucible Inc., 793 F.2d 1565, 1571, 230 USPQ
81, 84 (Fed. Cir. 1986) (The absence from the reference of any
element of a claim negates anticipation of that claim by the
applied reference). We must therefore reverse the § 102(b)
rejection of appealed claims 1, 4 through 11 and 14 through
22.
We also must reverse the rejection of dependent claim 20
under the second paragraph of § 112. When the limitation
pertaining to the “preprogrammed expert system” is read in
light of the specification as required in In re Hammack, 427
F.2d 1384, 1391, 166 USPQ 209, 215 (CCPA 1970), it is clear
4
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007