Appeal No. 99-0622 Page 5
Application No. 08/637,717
The complete text of the examiner's rejections and
response to the argument presented by the appellant appears in
the answer (Paper No. 13, mailed September 14, 1998), while
the complete statement of the appellant's argument can be
found in the brief (Paper No. 11 ½, filed June 12, 1998).
OPINION
In reaching our decision in this appeal, we have given
careful consideration to the appellant's specification and
claims, to the applied prior art references, and to the
respective positions articulated by the appellant and the
examiner. As a consequence of our review, we make the
determinations which follow.
We shall not sustain the examiner's rejection of claims
42, 44 through 47 and 50 under 35 U.S.C. § 102(b) as
anticipated by Leach.
Anticipation is established only when a single prior art
reference discloses, expressly or under the principles of
inherency, each and every element of a claimed invention. RCA
Corp. v. Applied Digital Data Sys., Inc., 730 F.2d 1440, 1444,
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007