Appeal No. 2002-1633
Application 09/281,093
DISCUSSION
I. The 35 U.S.C. § 102(b) rejection of claims 1, 2, 5, 6, 8, 9,
14, 16 and 17
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. 1984). It is not necessary that the
reference teach what the subject application teaches, but only
that the claim read on something disclosed in the reference,
i.e., that all of the limitations in the claim be found in or
fully met by the reference. Kalman v. Kimberly Clark Corp., 713
F.2d 760, 772, 218 USPQ 781, 789 (Fed. Cir. 1983), cert. denied,
465 U.S. 1026 (1984).
Stevenson discloses “an automatic stacking apparatus which
can collate and stack laminate plastic sample chips for forming
into loops for use by customers in the selection of laminate
plastic sheets for purchase” (column 1, line 66, through column
2, line 3). The apparatus 2 includes a supporting platform 24, a
plurality (e.g., twelve) of reservoirs 6 each filled with a stack
of chips 4 of a particular color, pattern or composition,
receivers 8 movable past the reservoirs over a series of
3
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007