Appeal No. 2005-1278 Page 12
Application No. 10/145,226
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."
The appellant argues (brief, p. 10) that none of the raised profiles 32 in Jacques
'342 extend longitudinally along the length of the base as required by claim 12.
Therefore, claims 12 to 18, 26 and 27 are not anticipated by Jacques '342. The
examiner did not respond to this argument in the answer.
Claim 12 includes the limitation of "a base having at least one raised member
extending longitudinally along the length thereof for accommodating the curvature of the
object." Jacques '342 teaches a bottom wall 12 (i.e., base) having a series of raised
profiles 32 (six being shown) which serve as abutments for the lower part of bottles
Page: Previous 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007