Appeal No. 2001-2194
Application No. 08/995,722
principles of inherency, each and every element of a claimed
invention. See In re Schreiber, 128 F.3d 1473, 1477, 44 USPQ2d
1429, 1431 (Fed. Cir. 1997); In re Paulsen, 30 F.3d 1475, 1478-
79, 31 USPQ2d 1671, 1673 (Fed. Cir. 1994); In re Spada, 911 F.2d
705, 708, 15 USPQ2d 1655, 1657 (Fed. Cir. 1990); and RCA Corp. v.
Applied Digital Data Sys., Inc., 730 F.2d 1440, 1444, 221 USPQ
385, 388 (Fed. Cir. 1984). However, the law of anticipation does
not require that the reference teach specifically what an
appellant has disclosed and is claiming but only that the claims
on appeal "read on" something disclosed in the reference, i.e.,
all limitations of the claim are found in the reference. See
Kalman v. Kimberly-Clark Corp., 713 F.2d 760, 772, 218 USPQ 781,
789 (Fed. Cir. 1983), cert. denied, 465 U.S. 1026 (1984).
Claims 1 through 3 set forth a docking unit for mounting a
portable computer comprising, inter alia, a first locking portion
and a second locking portion provided on the outer wall of a main
body (claim 1) or a first kensington slot and a second kensington
slot provided on the outer wall of a main body (claims 2 and 3).
Claims 12 and 13 are drawn to a portable electronic apparatus
comprising, inter alia, a first locking portion and a second
locking portion provided on the outer wall of a main body (claim
4
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007