Appeal No. 1997-0760
Application No. 08/003,000
can be found only if the prior art reference discloses every
element of the claim," In re King, 801 F.2d 1324, 1326, 231
USPQ 136, 138 (Fed. Cir. 1986); Lindemann Maschinenfabrik v.
American Hoist and Derrick, 730 F.2d 1452, 1458, 221 USPQ 481,
485 (Fed. Cir. 1984), and Parkin does not disclose every
element of claim 20, Parkin does not anticipate claim 20 nor
its dependents, claims 21 and 23. Further, since claim 29
includes the same limitations which have been found to be
lacking from Parkin as claim 20, Parkin does not anticipate
claim 29. With respect to claims 22 and 30, although the
rejection was made under 35 U.S.C. § 103, since no additional
reference or motivation for modification was applied which
might overcome the deficiencies described above, Parkin does
not render obvious claims 22 and 30. Therefore, we will
reverse both the anticipation rejections and the obviousness
rejections.
9
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007