Appeal No. 2000-0484
Application No. 08/677,401
housing." He asserts, in essence, that one of ordinary skill
would have found it obvious to form the Koch chamber housing
24, which has facets (sides) 32, 34, 36, by machining a forged
piece of metal into the configuration of the housing in view
of Cross' disclosure that a forged chamber is capable of
withstanding greater temperatures and pressures than a welded
chamber (page 2, lines 15 to 23). The examiner states that
Koch's chamber presumably is formed by welding aluminum
sheets, noting appellants' disclosure that such chamber
construction (shown in Fig. 2a) is conventional, and also
notes appellants' disclosure at page 13, lines 19 to 21, that
rolled aluminum forgings were known in the art.
We do not agree with appellants' argument to the effect
that Cross is nonanalogous art (brief, page 13), since it
satisfies at least the second criterion of the test for
analogous art enunciated in In re Clay, 966 F.2d 656, 658, 23
USPQ2d 1058, 1060 (Fed. Cir. 1992), i.e., it is reasonably
pertinent to the problem with which appellants were involved,
namely, the fabrication of a chamber. Also, appellants'
arguments concerning the length of time since issuance of the
Cross reference (in 1929) are unpersuasive absent any showing
3
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007