Appeal No. 96-4083
Application 08/268,039
It is axiomatic that anticipation of a claim under
§ 102 can be found only if the prior art reference discloses
every element of the claim. See In re King, 801 F.2d 1324,
1326, 231 USPQ 136, 138 (Fed. Cir. 1986) and Lindemann
Maschinenfabrik GMBH v. American Hoist & Derrick Co., 730 F.2d
1452, 1458,
221 USPQ 481, 485 (Fed. Cir. 1984). "Anticipation is
established only when a single prior art reference discloses,
expressly or under principles of inherency, each and every
element of a claimed invention." RCA Corp. v. Applied Digital
Data Systems, Inc., 730 F.2d 1440, 1444, 221 USPQ 385, 388
(Fed. Cir. 1984), cert. dismissed, 468 U.S. 1228 (1994),
citing Kalman v. Kimberly-Clark Corp., 713 F.2d 760, 772, 218
USPQ 781, 789 (Fed. Cir. 1983).
Appellants argue on page 9 of the brief that Suzuki
does not disclose Appellants' limitation of having the bypass
capacitor directly connected to the common substrate. We note
Appellants' claim 33 recites "a bypass capacitor whose
electrodes are respectively connected to an electrode of said
8
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007