Appeal No. 1997-1314
Application No. 08/300,684
It is axiomatic that anticipation of a claim under
§ 102 can be found only if the prior art reference discloses
every element of the claim. See In re King, 801 F.2d 1324,
1326, 231 USPQ 136, 138 (Fed. Cir. 1986) and Lindemann
Maschinenfabrik GMBH v. American Hoist & Derrick Co., 730 F.2d
1452, 1458, 221 USPQ 481, 485 (Fed. Cir. 1984). "Anticipation
is established only when a single prior art reference
discloses, expressly or under principles of inherency, each
and every element of a claimed invention." RCA Corp. v.
Applied Digital Data Systems, Inc., 730 F.2d 1440, 1444, 221
USPQ 385, 388 (Fed. Cir. 1984), cert. dismissed, 468 U.S. 1228
(1984), citing Kalman v. Kimberly-Clark Corp., 713 F.2d 760,
772, 218 USPQ 781, 789 (Fed. Cir. 1983).
With respect to claims 7 and 10, the Examiner states
that Fukuzawa discloses the claimed support spring for a
cathode ray tube as shown in Figure 9. In Figure 9, element
30 is considered the base portion of the spring and elements
31e are considered the two raised ribs. (Answer-page 3.) We
also note that 31d depicts the body portion while 31c
represents the aperture portion.
4
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007