Appeal No. 2005-0100 Page 5
Application No. 09/962,744
The appellants' specification describes the claimed "direct marketing area[s]" as
"[r]egions . . . defined by Nielsen for the continental United States," (Spec. at 1), which
"are based on television signal areas." (Id.) Reading the limitations in light of the
specification, claims 1, 6, 10, 15, 23, 31, and 35 require replacing a geographic input
parameter of a database query with a direct marketing region defined by Nielsen based
on television signal areas in the continental United States.
B. ANTICIPATION AND OBVIOUSNESS DETERMINATIONS
"Having construed the claim limitations at issue, we now compare the claims to
the prior art to determine if the prior art anticipates those claims." In re Cruciferous
Sprout Litig., 301 F.3d 1343, 1349, 64 USPQ2d 1202, 1206 (Fed. Cir. 2002). "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. 1987) (citing
Structural Rubber Prods. Co. v. Park Rubber Co., 749 F.2d 707, 715, 223 USPQ 1264,
1270 (Fed. Cir. 1984); Connell v. Sears, Roebuck & Co., 722 F.2d 1542, 1548, 220
USPQ 193, 198 (Fed. Cir. 1983); Kalman v. Kimberly-Clark Corp., 713 F.2d 760, 771,
218 USPQ 781, 789 (Fed. Cir. 1983)). "[A]bsence from the reference of any claimed
element negates anticipation." Kloster Speedsteel AB v. Crucible, Inc., 793 F.2d 1565,
1571, 230 USPQ 81, 84 (Fed. Cir. 1986).
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007