Appeal No. 1999-1854
Application No. 08/633,616
It is our view, after consideration of the record before
us, that the disclosure of Fujii does not fully meet the
invention as set forth in claims 1-21. Accordingly, we
reverse.
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 as
well as disclosing structure which is capable of performing
the recited functional limitations. RCA Corp. v. Applied
Digital Data Systems, Inc., 730 F.2d 1440, 1444, 221 USPQ 385,
388 (Fed. Cir.); cert. dismissed, 468 U.S. 1228 (1984); W.L.
Gore and Associates, Inc. v. Garlock, Inc., 721 F.2d 1540,
1554, 220 USPQ 303, 313 (Fed. Cir. 1983), cert. denied, 469
U.S. 851 (1984).
The Examiner, in making the 35 U.S.C. § 102(b) rejection,
has grouped all of the appealed claims 1-21 together, and
attempts to correlate (Answer, page 3) various structural
features of Fujii with the various limitations of the appealed
claims. In response, Appellants assert (Reply Brief, page 1)
that the Examiner has failed to address several claimed
6
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007