Appeal No. 2004-0053 Page 6
Application No. 09/678,635
edges of the head can be forced together to force the head up through the openings in
the terminal strip.
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.), cert. denied, 484 U.S. 827 (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. As set forth by the court in Kalman v.
Kimberly-Clark Corp., 713 F.2d 760, 772, 218 USPQ 781, 789 (Fed. Cir. 1983), cert.
denied, 465 U.S. 1026 (1984), it is only necessary for the claims to "'read on' something
disclosed in the reference, i.e., all limitations of the claim are found in the reference, or
'fully met' by it."
The examiner states (answer, pp. 6-7) that the claimed functional recitations
regarding the blind structure (e.g., the lead carrier) are met by (i.e., readable on)
Kressel since Kressel is capable of being used in the claimed manner.
The appellant argues that the claims are limited to the window covering
environment and that the claimed functional recitations are not met by Kressel.
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007