Appeal No. 2000-0941 Page 7
Application No. 09/077,362
cloth is in its rolled out condition and are rolled up on
the roller tube together with the roller blind cloth when
the roller blind cloth is in its rolled up condition,
each said flat additional cloth having means for
detachably fastening said flat additional cloth to said
zone.
We find ourselves in agreement with the appellant that
Cadmus does not anticipate claim 1 for the reasons set forth
in the brief (pages 5-6) and reply brief (pages 1-2). In that
regard, it is our opinion that Cadmus' strips 14 do not "hang
freely" from his shade 10 due to the presence of stitching 16.
We find ourselves in agreement with the appellant that
Cadmus does not anticipate claim 11 for the reasons set forth
in the brief (pages 6-7) and reply brief (page 2). In that
regard, we agree with the appellant that the claimed means for
detachably fastening the flat additional cloth to a zone on a
roller blind cloth is not readable on Cadmus' stitching 15.4
4In order to meet a "means-plus-function" limitation, the
prior art must (1) perform the identical function recited in
the means limitation and (2) perform that function using the
structure disclosed in the 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.
(continued...)
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007