Appeal No. 1998-1393 Page 8
Application No. 08/498,306
logically would have commended itself to the inventor's
attention in considering his problem. If the reference’s
disclosure has the same purpose as the claimed invention, the
reference relates to the same problem, and that fact supports
use of that reference in a rejection. An inventor may have
been motivated to consider the reference when making his
invention. Clay, 966 F.2d at 659, 23 USPQ2d at 1061.
Here, a problem with which the appellant are involved is
the “caller-ID feature,” (Spec. at 2), which informs a user
“of the identity of a pre-identified calling party before the
call is answered.” (Id.) Similarly, the problem that Fujioka
solves relates to “telephone networks ... [that] offer an
originating number notifying service ....” Col. 1, ll. 15-17.
The reference “enables the terminating subscriber of a c[a]ll
from a registered originating party to judge the originating
party from an audible indication ....” Id. at ll. 37-40.
Accordingly, both the claimed invention and Fujioka address
the problem of caller-identification. Therefore, the
reference reasonably pertains to the particular problem with
which the appellant was involved and is analogous art.
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007