Appeal No. 2004-0748 Page 4
Application No. 09/427,226
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."
Claims 1 and 2 on appeal read as follows:
1. A method of stacking chips by positioning at least two chip layers into an
assembly fixture comprising a floor, each layer comprising at least one chip, the
method comprising steps of:
(a) positioning a first chip layer directly on the floor;
(b) positioning a first spacer layer on the first chip layer;
(c) positioning at least one additional chip layer over the spacer layer;
(d) coupling the layers together; and
(e) removing the coupled layers from the assembly fixture, the coupled
layers comprising at least one stacked device.
2. A stacked device made by the method of claim 1.
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007