Appeal No. 2003-1561 Page 7
Application No. 09/632,840
explicitly or inherently (see Hazani v. Int'l Trade Comm'n, 126
F.3d 1473, 1477, 44 USPQ2d 1358, 1361 (Fed. Cir. 1997) and RCA
Corp. v. Applied Digital Data Systems, Inc., 730 F.2d 1440, 1444,
221 USPQ 385, 388 (Fed. Cir. 1984)). However, the law of
anticipation does not require that the reference teach what the
appellants are claiming, but only that the claims on appeal "read
on" something disclosed in the reference (see Kalman v.
Kimberly-Clark Corp., 713 F.2d 760, 772, 218 USPQ 781, 789 (Fed.
Cir. 1983), cert. denied, 465 U.S. 1026 (1984)).
Anticipation under this section is a factual determination.
See In re Baxter Travenol Labs., 952 F.2d 388, 390, 21 USPQ2d
1281, 1283 (Fed. Cir. 1991) (citing In re Bond, 910 F.2d 831,
833, 15 USPQ2d 1566, 1567 (Fed. Cir. 1990). In the case before
us, the examiner has determined that either Abdel-Malik or Shaw
discloses, either expressly or inherently, a chewing gum meeting
every limitation of the invention set forth in appealed claims
20-32 and that either Cherukuri or Cook discloses, either
expressly or inherently, a chewing gum meeting every limitation
of the invention set forth in appealed claims 20, 21, 23-28 and
30-32.
Considering representative claim 20, we observe that
appellants do not specifically contest the examiner’s
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007