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 4Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 NextLast modified: November 3, 2007