Appeal No. 2001-2320
Application 09/097,295
DISCUSSION
The appellant’s argument (see, for example, pages 8 and 9 in
the main brief) that Parsons and Steenstrup, the examiner’s
primary references, are non-analogous art poses the threshold
issue in this appeal. In an obviousness determination under 35
U.S.C. § 103, a reference which is non-analogous is too remote to
be treated as prior art. In re Clay, 966 F.2d 656, 658-59, 23
USPQ2d 1058, 1060 (Fed. Cir. 1992). There are two criteria for
determining whether a reference is analogous: (1) whether the
reference is from the field of the inventor’s endeavor,
regardless of the problem addressed, and (2) if the reference is
not within the field of the inventor’s endeavor, whether it is
reasonably pertinent to the particular problem with which the
inventor was involved. Id.
Both Parsons and Steenstrup pertain to the manufacture of
packing elements wherein packing strips or teeth are affixed to a
base member.
The Parsons method comprises the steps of providing a metal
base member having a plurality of grooves, inserting packing
strips into the grooves, and securing the strips within the
grooves by rolling the material adjacent the sides of the grooves
into gripping engagement with the strips.
3
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007