Appeal No. 2003-1552
Serial No. 10/116,937
“Anticipation requires that every limitation of the claim in
issue be disclosed, either expressly or under principles of
inherency, in a single prior art reference.” Corning Glass Works
v. Sumitomo Electric, 868 F.2d 1251, 1255-56, 9 USPQ2d 1962, 1965
(Fed. Cir. 1989).
Rejection over Kato
Claim 21
Kato discloses a fishing lure body (10) which can be made of
plastic and has a large number of air bubbles sealed therein
(col. 2, lines 63-67; col. 3, lines 5-8). The body has a
cavity (12) to enhance its flexibility (col. 2, line 67 - col. 3,
line 1).
The appellant’s claim 21 requires a solid plastic body. The
examiner argues that Kato’s figure 2 shows a solid body wall
containing encapsulated air bubbles, and that this solid body
wall and the appellant’s solid body, both of which contain air
bubbles, are equally solid (answer, page 4).
The appellant’s claim 21, however, does not require a solid
body wall but, rather, requires a solid body. The relevant
dictionary definition of “solid” is “not hollowed out” (reply
brief, page 1). The appellant’s specification does not indicate
that the appellant gives the word “solid” a meaning which is
inconsistent with this definition.
3
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007