Appeal 2006-2511
Application 10/693,463
in the art would have to carefully pick and choose and combine the various
disclosures among the teachings of Stephens to obtain a coated substrate
(interference pigment) having the required components and blue
transmission color required by the claimed subject matter. While picking
and choosing may be entirely proper in making an obviousness rejection
under 35 U.S.C. § 103, it has no place in making a rejection under 35 U.S.C.
§ 102 for anticipation. See In re Arkley, 455 F.2d 586, 587-88, 172 USPQ
524, 526 (CCPA 1972). Furthermore, we conclude that Stephens does not
provide a disclosure with sufficient specificity to constitute a description of
the claimed coated substrate within the purview of 35 U.S.C. § 102. See
In re Schaumann, 572 F.2d 312, 315, 197 USPQ 5, 8 (CCPA 1978).
Accordingly, we do not sustain the rejection of the claims on appeal under
35 U.S.C. § 102(e) as anticipated by Stephens.
CONCLUSION
The rejection under 35 U.S.C. § 102(e) is reversed.
REVERSED
clj
PPG Industries, Inc.
Intellectual Property Department
One PPG Place
Pittsburgh, PA 15272
5
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5
Last modified: November 3, 2007