Appeal No. 1999-1127
Application 08/689,164
bonding process as a result of baking. No disclosure or
suggestion of bonding as relating to, produced by, or
dominated by physical forces is found. Thus, we agree with
Appellants that Saito fails to disclose or suggest use of
mechanical bonding as recited in claim 1.
It is axiomatic that anticipation of a claim under § 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 Sys.,
Inc., 730 F.2d 1440, 1444, 221 USPQ 385, 388 (Fed. Cir.),
cert. dismissed, 468 U.S. 1228 (1984), citing Kalman v.
Kimberly-Clark Corp., 713 F.2d 760, 772, 218 USPQ 781, 789
(Fed. Cir. 1983).
7
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007