Appeal No. 95-0192
Application No. 07/914,228
Appellants argue that the prior art references relied on
by the examiner are not relevant to each other and to the
claimed subject matter. This argument, however, is not
convincing. From our perspective, these prior art references
are relevant inasmuch as they are all directed to either the
same area of art as the claimed subject matter, or the problem
to be solved in the art. In re Clay, 966 F.2d 656, 659, 23
USPQ2d 1058, 1060-1 (Fed. Cir. 1992); In re Wood, 599 F.2d
1032, 1036, 202 USPQ 171, 174 (CCPA 1979). As is apparent
from the examiner’s discussion of the prior art in the Answer
and appellants’ own description of
the prior art in the Brief and the Reply Brief, the prior art
references in question, like the claimed subject matter,
discuss ingredients useful for forming polyurethane products,
i.e., the same area of art as the claimed subject matter.
Moreover,
they all discuss solving problems associated with improving
polyurethane products or improving processes for making
polyurethane products, i.e., the problem to be solved in the
art.
8
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007