Appeal No. 1998-1181
Application No. 08/442,883
Krolopp, the rejection of claims 49-50 and 57 under 35 U.S.C.
§ 103 as unpatentable over Blair, or the rejection of claims
46-50 and 55-56 under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as unpatentable over
Blair in view of Krolopp.
A. Rejection of Claims 46-48 and 55-56 under 35 U.S.C. §
102(b) as anticipated by Blair.
It is axiomatic that anticipation of a claim under 35
U.S.C. § 102 can be found only if the prior art reference
discloses every element of the claim. See In re King, 801
F.2d 1324, 1326, 231 USPQ 136, 138 (Fed. Cir. 1986) and
Lindemann Maschinenfabrik GMBH v. American Hoist & Derrick
Co., 730 F.2d 1452, 1458, 221 USPQ 481, 485 (Fed. Cir. 1984).
"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 Systems, Inc., 730 F.2d
1440, 1444, 221 USPQ 385, 388 (Fed. Cir. 1984), cert.
dismissed, 468 U.S. 1228 (1984), citing Kalman v. Kimberly-
5
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007