Ex parte PONTAILLIER et al. - Page 3




          Appeal No. 97-2621                                                          
          Application 08/432,442                                                      

          axis past an apertured portion of said G3 electrode in                      
          overlapping relationship therewith, and                                     
                    on the side of G3 electrode facing said G2                        
          electrode, said G3 electrode having two linear channels                     
          therein on either side of the inline apertures therein, said                
          channels being immediately adjacent said projections on said                
          G2 electrode and in a spaced nested relationship therewith.                 
                                     DISCUSSION                                       
               We affirm.                                                             
               Our opinion is based only on the arguments presented by                
          the appellant in his brief and reply brief.  Arguments not                  
          raised in the briefs are not before us, are not at issue, and               
          are not considered.                                                         
          The Anticipation Rejection                                                  
               Anticipation is established only when a single prior art               
          reference discloses, either expressly or under the principles               
          of inherency, each and every element of the claimed invention.              
          In re Spada, 911 F.2d 705, 707, 15 USPQ2d 1655, 1657 (Fed.                  
          Cir. 1990); RCA Corp. v. Applied Digital Data Sys., Inc., 730               
          F.2d 1440, 1444, 221 USPQ 385, 388 (Fed. Cir. 1984).  See also              
          In re                                                                       
          King, 801 F.2d 1324, 1326, 231 USPQ 136, 138 (Fed. Cir. 1986);              
          Lindemann Maschinenfabrik GMBH v. American Hoist & Derrick                  
          Co., 730 F.2d 1452, 1458, 221 USPQ 481, 485 (Fed. Cir. 1984).               
                                          3                                           





Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  13  Next 

Last modified: November 3, 2007