Appeal No. 1998-2576
Application 08/413,944
It is our view, after consideration of the record before us, that the disclosure of
Takahashi does not fully meet the invention as set forth in claims 1-11. 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 indicates how he reads the claimed invention on the disclosure of
Takahashi [answer, pages 4-7]. With respect to independent claim 1, appellant argues
there is no provision for manual shutter speed selection in Takahashi [brief, pages
5-10]. The examiner responds that the language of claim 1 is broad enough to be met by a
microcomputer which automatically determines a shutter speed which is then manually
executed by a user by pressing a shutter button [answer, page 7]. Appellant responds that
the pressing of a shutter button by the user does not mean that the device is operating
using a manual shutter speed [reply brief].
We agree with appellant. The disclosure of Takahashi does not relate to operating
a camera in a manual shutter speed mode, and the examiner’s attempt to read manual
3
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007