Appeal No. 2004-0839 Page 12
Application No. 09/347,695
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."
Our decision
We will not sustain the rejection of claim 1 as being anticipated by Berquist.
We agree with the appellant that the claimed orientation device engaged with the
frame for selectively orienting the frame to vertical is not met by Berquist's rubber or
elastomeric pads 20. Nevertheless, it is our determination that the claimed orientation
device engaged with the frame for selectively orienting the frame to vertical is readable
on Berquist's hydraulic cylinder 36 which positions vibratory frame 18 along with the
intermediate frame and push tube 68 in a vertical relation position relative to main
frame 16.
We agree with the appellant that the claimed hammer moveable relative to the
frame to contact the soil in a vertical direction for generating a case opening suitable for
Page: Previous 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007