Appeal No. 97-0883
Application 08/138,650
well as disclosing structure which is capable of performing
the recited functional limitations. RCA Corp. v. Applied
Digital Data Sys., Inc., 730 F.2d 1440, 1444, 221 USPQ 385,
388 (Fed. Cir.); cert. dismissed, 468 U.S. 1228 (1984); W.L.
Gore and Assocs. Inc. v. Garlock, Inc., 721 F.2d 1540, 1554,
220 USPQ 303, 313 (Fed. Cir. 1983), cert. denied, 469 U.S. 851
(1984).
With respect to representative, independent claim 1,
the examiner indicates how he reads the four elements of claim
1 on Weiss [answer, page 3]. Appellants argue that the
meaning of “task” as used in their claims is very much
different than the meaning of task used by Weiss. Appellants
also argue that the claimed invention and the teachings of
Weiss are in entirely different fields of technology [brief,
pages 4-6]. Since we are of the view that the examiner has
not properly considered all the language of the claims on
appeal, we do not sustain the examiner’s rejection of claims
1-9 as anticipated by Weiss.
As we noted above in the discussion of the invention,
a key feature of the invention is that certain events can be
5
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007