Appeal No. 2000-0916 Page 8
Application No. 08/907,965
specification or an equivalent structure. Cf. Carroll Touch
Inc. v. Electro Mechanical Sys. Inc., 15 F.3d 1573, 1578, 27
USPQ2d 1836, 1840 (Fed. Cir. 1994); Valmont Indus. Inc. v.
Reinke Mfg. Co., 983 F.2d 1039, 1042, 25 USPQ2d 1451, 1454
(Fed. Cir. 1993); Johnston v. IVAC Corp., 885 F.2d 1574, 1580,
12 USPQ2d 1382, 1386 (Fed. Cir. 1989).
The examiner contends (final rejection, p. 4) that the
claims under appeal are readable on Yasuno since the braking 3
system of Yasuno operates independently of the steering
equipment, the braking system of Yasuno inherently operates
during a fault in the steering equipment. The appellants
argue (brief, pp. 19-22) that the claims under appeal are not
anticipated by Yasuno since Yasuno's braking arrangement does
not produce, expressly or inherently, selectively different
3The inquiry as to whether a reference anticipates a
claim must focus on what subject matter is encompassed by the
claim and what subject matter is described by the reference.
As set forth by the court in Kalman v. Kimberly-Clark Corp.,
713 F.2d 760, 772, 218 USPQ 781, 789 (Fed. Cir. 1983), cert.
denied, 465 U.S. 1026 (1984), it is only necessary for the
claims to "'read on' something disclosed in the reference,
i.e., all limitations of the claim are found in the reference,
or 'fully met' by it."
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007