Appeal No. 1998-0241 Page 7
Application No. 08/465,373
standing or falling therewith. See In re Young, 927 F.2d 588, 590, 18 USPQ2d 1089, 1091
(Fed. Cir. 1991); In re Wood, 582 F.2d 638, 642, 199 USPQ 137, 140 (CCPA 1978). We
shall decide the appeal of this rejection separately as to claim 6.
We direct our attention first to claim 1, which reads as follows:
1. A method of distributing fibers comprising producing fibers with a
fiberizing apparatus, causing said fibers to travel in a generally downward
direction, applying low frequency sound having a frequency less than about 30
cycles per second to at least one portion of said fibers to cause said at least one
portion of said fibers to deviate in its direction of travel.
Troth discloses a method comprising producing fibers 1, forwarding the fibers in a
downward direction by means of slot jet devices 2 and deflecting the fibers alternately by
opposed air streams issuing from deflection gaps 5, 6 supplied by plenums 7, 8, 9, 10. The
plenums are connected through manifolds and transfer lines to compressed air supplies
governed by rotary valves having variable speed drives that alternately provide air to the
opposing plenums at a minimum deflection frequency of 1.9 to 15.3 cycles per second (column
5, lines 35-37).
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, 221 USPQ 385, 388 (Fed. Cir.
1984). In other words, there must be no difference between the claimed invention and the
reference disclosure, as viewed by a person of ordinary skill in the field of the invention.
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007