Appeal No. 97-1697
Application No. 08/336,170
the Kurtin reference does not show a flexible elongated
operating member movable lengthwise in response to movement of
the finger-operated positioner. We find it unnecessary to
make a factual finding about whether members 16' and 16" of
the Kurtin reference are flexible elongated operating member,
inasmuch as it is clear that members 16' and 16" do not move
lengthwise in response to movement of the finger operated
positioner knurled nut 20.
Anticipation by a prior art reference does not require
either the inventive concept of the claimed subject matter or
the recognition of inherent properties that may be possessed
by the prior art reference. See Verdegaal Bros. Inc. v. Union
Oil Co., 814 F.2d 628, 633, 2 USPQ2d 1051, 1054 (Fed. Cir.
1987). A prior art reference anticipates the subject matter
of a claim when that references discloses, either expressly or
under the principles of inherency, each and every element set
forth in the claim. See In re Paulsen, 30 F.3d 1475, 1478,
1479, 31 USPQ2d 1671, 1673, (Fed. Cir. 1994). The law of
anticipation does not require that the reference teach what
the appellants are claiming but only the claims on appeal read
5
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007