Appeal No. 1997-4444
Application 08/427,884
the arguments. Arguments not made in the brief will normally
not be considered. See 37 CFR §§ 1.192(a), 1.192(c)(8)(iii),
and 1.192(c)(8)(iv). The content of the declaration is
discussed in the Advisory Action (Paper No. 10). We add that
the invention is defined by the claims, not the disclosed
invention. Thus, differences between the disclosed invention
and the references are of no significance to the patentability
analysis. For example, a reference could have an extremely
complicated gripping mechanism, but if the claims recite only
a "gripping device," the limitation would be met by the
reference. Although we do not specifically address the
paragraphs of the Helmick declaration, we have fully
considered the statements made therein in arriving at our
patentability decision.
35 U.S.C. § 102
"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).
- 11 -
Page: Previous 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007