Appeal 2007-3934
Application 10/324,860
hollow interior of the shell 202 into two compartments: a first or dry towel
compartment 226 and a second or pre-moistened towelette compartment
228” (McClymonds, col. 8, ll. 40-46).
Therefore, rather than teaching a conformation wherein the second
substrate is located within at least a portion of the rolled first substrate’s
cylindrical interior space, McClymonds’ two substrates are contained within
an apparatus that ensures their physical separation. The Examiner has not
identified, and we do not find, a teaching in McClymonds wherein the
second substrate is located within at least a portion of the rolled first
substrate’s cylindrical interior space. Thus, McClymonds fails to teach all of
the limitations of independent claims 1 and 11.
Anticipation requires that every element and limitation of the claimed
invention must be found in a single prior art reference, arranged as in the
claim. Karsten Mfg. Corp. v. Cleveland Golf Co., 242 F.3d 1376, 1383, 58
USPQ2d 1286, 1291 (Fed. Cir. 2001). For the foregoing reasons we find
that McClymonds fails to anticipate Appellant’s claimed invention.
Accordingly, we reverse the rejection of claims 1-19 under 35 U.S.C.
§ 102(b) as being anticipated by McClymonds.
CONCLUSION
In summary, we reverse the rejection of claims 1-19 under 35 U.S.C.
§ 102(b) as being anticipated by McClymonds.
REVERSED
5
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 Next
Last modified: September 9, 2013