Appeal No. 1999-0969
Application No. 08/790,501
Appellant's grouping of claim 6 separate from claim 1
urges "Claim 6 further requires: (1) a plurality of breakaway
segments; and (2) volumetric relationship of the breakaway
segments to the main segment; (3) the predetermined drop rates
corresponding to the number (or total volume) of segments
broken away" and "[t]his plurality of volumetrically related
segments is nowhere taught or suggested in Rigney '790"
(brief, page 9).
As noted above, Figure 1 of Rigney shows a main segment
of a crawdad body with legs joined to the body at junction
points. We find that the shape of the crawdad body in Rigney
is identical, or virtually identical, to the shape in
appellant's application.
We further find that the volumetric relationship of the
breakaway segments to the main segment and the predetermined
drop rates corresponding to the number (or total volume) of
segments broken away are expressly described, or inherent, in
the disclosure of Rigney. It is sufficient for purposes of
anticipation that the reference inherently discloses each
element (or elements). See Verdegaal Bros., Inc. v. Union Oil
Co., 814 F.2d 628, 631, 2 USPQ2d 1051, 1053.
8
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007