Appeal No. 2004-0118 Page 4
Application No. 09/214,663
may be possessed by the reference. See Verdegaal Bros., Inc. v. Union Oil Co., 814
F.2d 628, 633, 2 USPQ2d 1051, 1054 (Fed. Cir.), cert. denied, 484 U.S. 827 (1987).
Nor does it require that the reference teach what the applicant is claiming, but only that
the claim on appeal "read on" something disclosed in the reference, i.e., all limitations of
the claim are found 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).
With regard to claim 1, the examiner has taken the position that the claimed
“spacers” read on the baffles 13 shown on the right side of Luigi’s Figure 1, and that
these spacers are located “in the region of the weld seam” which is, according to Luigi,
at flanges 11 (see page 2, lines 17 and 18). We find ourselves in agreement with the
examiner that the subject matter recited in claim 1 is anticipated by Luigi.
The reference discloses at the right side of Figure 1 a baffle 13 comprising two
spacer parts that come together to establish an exact distance between the upper wall
and the bottom of the tank. We point out here that the appellant has not directed us to
any portion of the specification which would support a conclusion that “in the region of
the weld” (emphasis added) would be so defined or interpreted by one of ordinary skill
in the art as to exclude a baffle located such as that shown on the right side of Figure 1
from meeting this requirement of claim 1. Moreover, we further note that as depicted in
Figure 1 Luigi’s weld seam 11 extends around the entire circumference of the tank, and
since elements 13 have been defined as “baffles” (page 4), it is our view that one of
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007