Appeal No. 2006-1203
Application No. 10/370,976
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), it is only necessary for the claims to “‘read on’
something disclosed in the prior art reference, i.e., all
limitations of the claim are found in the reference, or ‘fully
met’ by it.” See also Atlas Powder Co. v. IRECO Inc., 190 F.3d
at 1346, 51 USPQ2d at 1945 (Fed. Cir. 1999) (quoting Titanium
Metals Corp. v. Banner, 778 F.2d 775, 781, 227 USPQ 773, 778
(Fed. Cir. 1985)).
In determining the subject matter encompassed by claim 1, we
agree with the Examiner that the claim merely requires that the
two elements of an antenna have resonant frequencies in two
different frequency bands. However, as acknowledged by
Appellants (brief, page 5), Tran does disclose that the two
antenna strips have different frequency bands (col. 12, lines 4-
15). Although these bands are offset from a center frequency and
each other by a small amount and overlap each other (col. 12,
lines 15-18), they are nonetheless two distinct bands.
Similarly, we remain unconvinced by Appellants’ argument that
because the antenna of Tran is operated in a single-band, the
claims do not read on Tran’s disclosed dual strip configuration.
5
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007