Appeal No. 2006-1300
Application No. 08/203,672
pouch. Graham teaches that this labeling arrangement,
which is isolated from filling compartment 27, contributes
to the structural and hygienic integrity of the bag. By
way of example, Graham asserts a reduced risk of puncturing
a fluid-filled compartment 27 with an instrument used to
mark the label (see column 1, line 38, through column 2,
line 7; and column 3, line 57, through column 4, line 2).
Anticipation is established only when a single prior
art reference discloses, expressly or under 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). It is not
necessary that the reference teach what the subject
application teaches, but only that the claim read on
something disclosed in the reference, i.e., that all of the
limitations in the claim be found in or fully met by the
reference. Kalman v. Kimberly Clark Corp., 713 F.2d 760,
772, 218 USPQ 781, 789 (Fed. Cir. 1983), cert. denied, 465
U.S. 1026 (1984).
The appellants’ position that the § 102(b) rejection
of claims 20-23 is unsound focuses on independent claim 20
(see pages 9-10 in the main brief and page 4 in the reply
brief).
5
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007