Appeal No. 1998-1782 Page 7
Application No. 08/472,332
To support a rejection of a claim under 35 U.S.C. §
102(b), it must be shown that each element of the claim is
found, either expressly described or under principles of
inherency, in a single prior art reference. See Kalman v.
Kimberly-Clark Corp., 713 F.2d 760, 772, 218 USPQ 781, 789
(Fed. Cir. 1983), cert. denied, 465 U.S. 1026 (1984).
All the claims under appeal recite a retro-reflective
sign including "a single layer face member incorporating
information therein."
The appellant argues (brief, pp. 6-8 and reply brief, pp.
1-2) that the above-noted limitation is not readable on
Eskilson's reflector 12. The examiner argues (answer, pp. 7-
8) that the above-noted limitation is readable on Eskilson's
reflector 12.
The inquiry as to whether a reference anticipates a claim
must focus on what subject matter is encompassed by the claim
and what subject matter is described by the reference. As set
forth by the court in Kalman v. Kimberly-Clark Corp., 713 F.2d
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007