Appeal No. 98-1922 Page 7
Application No. 08/253,721
uppermost surface of the slide ; and (3) submitting that the3
claim is met by Maeda's slide since it is capable of
performing the function, that is the claimed contact surface
is readable on Maeda's raised rim. We agree. In that 4
regard, the slider device 3 of Maeda is fully capable of
receiving an object which overlies the raised rim 6. As such,
it is our determination that the claimed contact surface being
the uppermost surface of the slide reads on the raised rim 6. 5
Since all the limitations of claim 16 are found in Maeda,
the decision of the examiner to reject claim 16 under 35
U.S.C.
§ 102(b) is affirmed.
3The specie depicted in the appellants Figures 14 and 17
is recited in dependent claim 12.
4The appellants did not reply to the examiner's response
to the appellants' argument.
5As set forth by the court in Kalman, it is only
necessary for the claims to "'read on' something disclosed in
the reference, i.e., all limitations of the claim are found in
the reference, or 'fully met' by it."
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007