Appeal No. 1999-2556
Application 08/774,848
bait compartments 8 formed by an apertured cylindrical wall 9
and partitions 7 disposed on the base in surrounding relation
to the wall 6, an insect poison compartment 11 formed by a rim
4 disposed about the periphery of the base, and a canopy 12
disposed above the foregoing elements.
Anticipation is established only when a single prior art
reference discloses, expressly or under 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). 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).
Claim 44 reads on the exterminator disclosed by Watson.
More particularly, Watson’s exterminator certainly constitutes
an “animal control device” as recited in the preamble of claim
44, with Watson’s base 1, lure compartment 6a, cylindrical
5
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007