Appeal No. 2006-3106
Application 10/209,746
A claim is anticipated only if each and every element as set forth in
the claim is found, either expressly or inherently described, in a single prior
art reference. Verdegaal Bros. Inc. v. Union Oil Co., 814 F.2d 628, 631,
2 USPQ2d 1051, 1053 (Fed. Cir.). The inquiry as to whether a reference
anticipates a claim must focus on what subject matter 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, 771, 218 USPQ
781, 789 (Fed. Cir. 1983), it is only necessary for the claims to "'read on'
something disclosed in the reference, i.e., all limitations of the claim are
found in the reference, or 'fully met' by it." While all elements of the
claimed invention must appear in a single reference, additional references
may be used to interpret the anticipating reference and to shed light on its
meaning, particularly to those skilled in the art at the relevant time. See
Studiengesellschaft Kohle, m.b.H v. Dart Indus., Inc., 726 F.2d 724, 726-
727, 220 USPQ 841, 842 (Fed. Cir. 1984).
We must point out, however, that anticipation under 35 U.S.C. § 102
is established only when a single prior art reference discloses, either
expressly or under the principles of inherency, each and every element of a
claimed invention. See RCA Corp. v. Applied Digital Data Systems, Inc.,
730 F.2d 1440, 1444, 221 USPQ 385, 388 (Fed. Cir. 1984).
4
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007