Appeal No. 2001-2601
Application No. 09/167,897
Rejections at Issue
Claims 1-9, 13, 14 and 16-21 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C.
§ 102 as being anticipated by Briechle.
Claims 10, 11, 15 and 22 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C.
§ 103 as being unpatentable over Briechle in view of Kayser.
Claim 12 stands rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being
unpatentable over Briechle in view of Failing.
OPINION
With full consideration being given the subject matter on
appeal, the Examiner's rejections and the argument of Appellant
and Examiner, for the reasons stated infra, we reverse the
Examiner's rejection of claims 1-9, 13, 14 and 16-21 under
35 U.S.C. § 102, and we reverse the Examiner's rejection of
claims 10-12, 15 and 22 under 35 U.S.C. § 103.
We will first address the rejection of claims 1-9, 13, 14
and 16-21 under 35 U.S.C. § 102. 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)
55
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007