Appeal No. 96-2623
Application No. 08/240,095
suggestion, or motivation to modify Stiff by the teachings of
Johnston, and (3) the declaration of Roger Bialic establishes
that the claims of the present application have met with great
commercial success in the marketplace. 7
We find that Johnston is analogous art. The test for non-
analogous art is first whether the art is within the field of the
inventor’s endeavor and, if not, whether it is reasonably
pertinent to the problem with which the inventor was involved.
In re Wood, 599 F.2d 1032, 1036, 202 USPQ 171, 174 (CCPA 1979).
A reference is reasonably pertinent if, even though it may be in
a different field of endeavor, it logically would have commended
itself to an inventor’s attention in considering his problem
because of the matter with which it deals. In re Clay, 966 F.2d
656, 659, 23 USPQ2d 1058, 1061 (Fed. Cir. 1992). In the present
instance, one problem faced by the appellants was how to apply
equal pressure across a cap and indicia by the pressing surfaces
of the platens in the closed position. In that an objective of8
Johnston is the application of equal pressure across a laminate
7We will address arguments (1) and (2) in this section of
our opinion. The appellants' argument (3) will be addressed in a
later section of this opinion.
8See page 3, lines 5-11, of the appellants' specification.
9
Page: Previous 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007