Appeal No. 1998-1711 Page 11
Application No. 08/506,387
satisfy both the enablement and description requirements of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C.
§ 112, we shall not sustain the examiner's rejection of claims 5-7 thereunder.
The anticipation rejection
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).
Independent claim 3 recites, inter alia, a windshield washing liquid reservoir and at least
one further liquid reservoir, which we interpret as requiring two autonomous reservoirs or
compartments each capable of containing liquid independently of the other reservoir.
Therefore, the examiner's position that the two elongate hollow portions 120, 140 of Eustache,
which together with lateral portions 160, 180 form a single, somewhat toroidally shaped
recipient or reservoir 100 surrounding an air conduit 190, respond to the windshield washing
liquid reservoir and the further reservoir is not well founded. As we see it, Eustache discloses
only one liquid reservoir and, thus, does not anticipate the subject matter of claim 1.
Accordingly, we shall not sustain the examiner's rejection of independent claim 1, or it follows
of claims 2 and 3 which depend from claim 1.
Page: Previous 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007