Appeal No. 2006-0325 Παγε 12
Application No. 10/152,485
whether the damper is subjected to a force of traction or compression, it still remains
prestressed so that the force applied thereto is always damped at some point within the
amplitude of the movement imposed on the damper. See column 5, lines 54-62.
In light of the above, one of ordinary skill in the art would understand the
"dampening elements" recited in appellant's claims 1 and 6 to be elastic elements
specifically adapted to dampen, i.e., progressively brake movement from, both
compressive and tensile forces applied to the spine. This is consistent with the
definition of "dampener" as "A device for damping spring oscillations after abrupt
removal or application of a load" provided in McGraw-Hill Dictionary of Scientific and
Technical Terms, Fifth Edition (McGraw-Hill, Inc. 1994).
Anticipation is established only when a single prior art reference discloses,
expressly or under the 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). In other words, there must be no difference between
the claimed invention and the reference disclosure, as viewed by a person of ordinary
skill in the field of the invention. Scripps Clinic & Research Found. v. Genentech Inc.,
927 F.2d 1565, 1576, 18 USPQ2d 1001, 1010 (Fed. Cir. 1991).
As there is nothing in the disclosure of Westermann which would convey, either
explicitly or implicitly, to one of ordinary skill in the art that the plate-shaped elements
10, 12 of Westermann's correction implant are so adapted or are inherently capable of
Page: Previous 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007