Appeal No. 2006-0571
Application No. 09/951,407
35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as being unpatentable over Mohri in view of
Taguchi.
We have thoroughly reviewed the respective positions
advanced by appellants and the examiner. In so doing, we concur
with appellants that the examiner has not set forth a prima facie
case of anticipation or obviousness under § 102 and § 103,
respectively. Accordingly, we will not sustain the examiner's
rejections.
It is well settled that claim language must be given its
broadest reasonable interpretation consistent with the supporting
specification and the state of the prior art. In re Morris,
127 F.3d 1048, 1054-55, 44 USPQ2d 1023, 1027-28 (Fed. Cir. 1997).
In the present case, we agree with appellants that the instant
specification and the state of the art imparts a meaning to the
claim language "toner image-receiving layer" that does not
encompass a layer that has been developed with toner material.
We find that a reasonable interpretation of the claimed toner
image-receiving layer is a layer that exits prior to development
with toner material. Accordingly, we cannot adopt the examiner's
reasoning that the toner-developed layer of Mohri is tantamount
to a description of the claimed toner image-receiving layer
-3-
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007