Appeal No. 2001-2673
Application No. 09/299,470 Page 4
Anticipation is a question of fact. In re King, 801 F.2d
1324, 1326, 231 USPQ 136, 138 (Fed. Cir. 1986). A claim is
anticipated only if each and every element as set forth in the
claim is found, either expressly or inherently described, in a
single prior art reference. Verdegaal Bros. Inc. v. Union Oil
Co., 814 F.2d 628, 631, 2 USPQ2d 1051, 1053 (Fed. Cir. 1987).
The inquiry as to whether a reference anticipates a claim must
focus on what subject matter is encompassed by the claim and what
subject matter is described by the reference.
A prima facie case of obviousness is established by
presenting evidence that the reference teachings would appear to
be sufficient for one of ordinary skill in the relevant art
having the references before him to make the proposed combination
or other modification. See In re Lintner, 9 F.2d 1013, 1016, 173
USPQ 560, 562 (CCPA 1972). Furthermore, the conclusion that the
claimed subject matter is prima facie obvious must be supported
by evidence, as shown by some objective teaching in the prior art
or by knowledge generally available to one of ordinary skill in
the art that would have led that individual to modify the
relevant teachings to arrive at the claimed invention. See In re
Fine, 837 F.2d 1071, 1074, 5 USPQ2d 1596, 1598 (Fed. Cir. 1988).
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007