Ex Parte WOLFE et al - Page 3




              Appeal No. 2004-0658                                                                  Page 3                
              Application No. 09/419,579                                                                                  


              of the rejections, and to the brief (Paper No. 19, filed May 14, 2003) for the appellants'                  
              arguments thereagainst.                                                                                     


                                                       OPINION                                                            
                     In reaching our decision in this appeal, we have given careful consideration to                      
              the appellants' specification and claims, to the applied prior art references, and to the                   
              respective positions articulated by the appellants and the examiner.  As a consequence                      
              of our review, we make the determinations which follow.                                                     


              The anticipation rejection                                                                                  
                     We sustain the rejection of claims 1 and 6 under 35 U.S.C. § 102(b).                                 


                     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                   








Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  13  14  Next 

Last modified: November 3, 2007