Appeal No. 1998-2383 Page 9
Application No. 08/116,355
attached stationarily at one end, at a door stop (52) or to a permanent wall bracket (column 5,
lines 37-40), and attached at the other end, by means of a foot strap (79), to the foot of the leg
which is not kneeling. The exerciser takes a sprinter start position with the leg extended behind
and slowly pulls the leg forward, away from the knee of the kneeling leg, to stretch and
elongate the element. The exerciser then slowly returns the moving leg to the starting position.
This movement also moves the foot of the moving leg toward and away from the foot of the
kneeling leg. While Tee explicitly discloses that the exercise illustrated in Figure 4E exercises
the thigh, it is apparent to us that such movement of the leg necessarily also exercises the
gluteal muscles of the exerciser. Thus, we conclude that Tee anticipates the method of claim5
35. A disclosure that anticipates under 35 U.S.C. § 102 also renders the claim unpatentable
under 35 U.S.C. § 103, for "anticipation is the epitome of obviousness." Jones v. Hardy, 727
F.2d 1524, 1529, 220 USPQ 1021, 1025 (Fed. Cir. 1984). See also In re Fracalossi, 681
F.2d 792, 794, 215 USPQ 569, 571 (CCPA 1982); In re Pearson, 494 F.2d 1399, 1402, 181
USPQ 641, 644 (CCPA 1974). Accordingly, we shall sustain the examiner's rejection of claim
35, and claims 36-38 which stand or fall with claim 35 (brief, page 8).
Anticipation is established when a single prior art reference discloses, expressly or under the principles of5
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). It is not necessary that the reference teach what the subject
application teaches, but only that the claim read on something disclosed in the reference, i.e., that all of the
limitations in the claim be found in or fully met by the reference. Kalman v. Kimberly Clark Corp., 713 F.2d 760,
772, 218 USPQ 781, 789 (Fed. Cir. 1983), cert. denied, 465 U.S. 1026 (1984). Under the principles of inherency, if
the disclosure is sufficient to show that the natural result flowing from the operation as taught would result in the
performance of the questioned function, it seems to be well settled that the disclosure should be regarded as
sufficient. See In re Oelrich, 666 F.2d 578, 581, 212 USPQ 323, 326 (CCPA 1981)
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007