Source: http://www.ptab.us/2015/10/reading-and-bates-beckman-symbol-tech.html
Timestamp: 2019-04-20 10:26:25+00:00

Document:
PTAB.US: reading and bates, beckman, symbol tech.
While a reference must enable someone to practice the invention in order to anticipate under §102(b), a non-enabling reference may qualify as prior art for the purpose of determining obviousness under § 103. Reading & Bates Constr. Co. v. Baker Energy Resources Corp., 748 F.2d 645, 652, 223 USPQ 1168, 1173 (Fed.Cir. 1984) (reference that lacks enabling disclosure is not anticipating, but “itself may qualify as a prior art reference under § 103, but only for what is disclosed in it” (emphasis in original)); see Beckman Instruments, Inc. v. LKB Produkter AB, 892 F.2d 1547, 1551, 13 USPQ2d 1301, 1304 (Fed.Cir. 1989) (“[e]ven if a reference discloses an inoperative device, it is prior art for all that it teaches”).
Symbol Technologies, Inc. v. Opticon, Inc., 935 F.2d 1569, 1578 (Fed. Cir. 1991).
Labels: beckman , reading and bates , symbol tech.

References: §102
 § 103
 v. 
 § 103
 v. 
 v.