Appeal No. 2006-0978 Page 6
Application No. 10/236,087
[or 24’] having a right angle undercut for snap retention over a right-angle ledge 25 [or
25’] formed on a flat outer face 26 in a top end of a connecting web 27 [or 27’] of the
inner casing connecting frame molding 12 [or outer sash connecting frame molding 13]”
(column 2, last paragraph). While there may be a friction fit arrangement between the
connecting web 27 and the slot 21, Guillemet ‘349 does not explicitly disclose one or
give any indication that such an arrangement is necessarily present and the undercut
snap retention arrangement in no way implies or necessitates a friction fit arrangement
between the slot 21 (or jamb section 15) and the connecting web 27.
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). Under principles of inherency, when a reference is
silent about an asserted inherent characteristic, it must be clear that the missing
descriptive matter is necessarily present in the thing described in the reference, and that
it would be so recognized by persons of ordinary skill. Continental Can Co. v. Monsanto
Co., 948 F.2d 1264, 1268, 20 USPQ2d 1746, 1749 (Fed. Cir. 1991). For the reasons
discussed above, we conclude that Guillemet ‘349 does not disclose, expressly or under
the principles of inherency, each and every element of claims 1 and 11. Accordingly,
the rejection of independent claims 1 and 11, and claims 2-10 and 12-17 depending
therefrom, cannot be sustained.
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007