Appeal No. 97-3926
Application 08/481,091
D. Level of skill
The level of skill in the art is represented by the
references. See In re Oelrich, 579 F.2d 86, 91, 198 USPQ 210,
214 (CCPA 1978) ("the PTO usually must evaluate both the scope
and content of the prior art and the level of ordinary skill
solely on the cold words of the literature"); In re GPAC Inc.,
57 F.3d 1573, 1579, 35 USPQ2d 1116, 1121 (Fed. Cir. 1995)
(Board did not err in adopting the approach that the level of
skill in the art was best determined by the references of
record).
E. The merits of the § 102(b) rejection
Anticipation under 35 U.S.C. § 102 requires that each
element of the claim in issue be found, either expressly
described or under principles of inherency, in a single prior
art reference. In re King, 801 F.2d 1324, 1327, 231 USPQ 136,
138 (Fed. Cir. 1986).
Although the examiner states (Answer at 3) that he is
relying on Siddiq's Figure 4, it is clear from his reference
"two set[s] of instructions" that he is actually relying on
Figure 5, which shows a cleaning tape including, in series, a
first diagnostic/instructional segment 6, a transition segment
- 5 -
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007