Appeal No. 2003-0673
Application 09/795,307
DISCUSSION
I. The 35 U.S.C. § 102(b) rejection of claim 8
O’Malley discloses an apparatus for supporting containers
adapted to receive different categories of trash, e.g., glass,
metal cans, paper and garbage, for recycling. The apparatus
includes a frame 10 composed of various pieces of hollow tubing,
and a pair of wheels 19, a handle 20 and a plurality (four) of
trash container supports 26 connected to the frame. Each trash
container support 26 comprises a rectangular horizontal retainer
27 and a vertical retainer 28 dimensioned to receive a trash
container 29.
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).
3
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007