Appeal No. 2005-0156
Application No. 09/816,348
THE REJECTION
Claims 1 through 4 and 6 through 11 stand rejected under
35 U.S.C. § 102(b) as being anticipated by U.S. Patent No.
5,576,588 to Moribayashi et al. (Moribayashi).
Attention is directed to the brief (filed April 15, 2003)
and answer (mailed July 16, 2003) for the respective positions of
the appellants and examiner regarding the merits of this
rejection.
DISCUSSION
I. The examiner’s rejection
Anticipation is established only when a single prior art
reference discloses, expressly or under principles of inherency,
each and every element of a claimed invention. RCA Corp. v.
Applied Digital Data Sys., Inc., 730 F.2d 1440, 1444, 221 USPQ
385, 388 (Fed. Cir. 1984). It is not necessary that the
reference teach what the subject application teaches, but only
that the claim read on something disclosed in the reference,
i.e., that all of the limitations in the claim be found in or
fully met by the reference. Kalman v. Kimberly Clark Corp., 713
F.2d 760, 772, 218 USPQ 781, 789 (Fed. Cir. 1983), cert. denied,
465 U.S. 1026 (1984).
3
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007