Appeal No. 95-2333
Application 07/981,919
We agree with the examiner’s findings and adopt them
as our own.
A reference is analogous art if it is the same field
of endeavor or is reasonably pertinent to the particular
problem with which the inventor was involved. In re Deminski,
796 F.2d 436, 442, 230 USPQ 313, 315 (Fed. Cir. 1986). In the
present case, applicants’ field of endeavor is optical imaging
and printing. Specification at 1. Dannatt’s field of
endeavor is the same, optical imaging and printing. Column 1,
lines 5-10. Thus, Dannatt satisfies the first prong of the
test for analogous art.
The particular problem with which the inventor was
involved was improving the accuracy of optically transmitted
images. Specification at 2. Dannatt is reasonably pertinent
to that problem. Column 1, lines 50-64. Thus, Dannatt
satisfies the second prong of the test for analogous art.
With respect to combining teachings in an
obviousness determination, the mere fact that the prior art
may be modified in the manner suggested by the examiner does
not make the modification obvious unless the prior art
suggested the desirability of the modification. In re Fritch,
-4-
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007