Appeal No. 2000-0617
Application 08/706,025
the claimed invention. In re Keller, 642 F.2d 413, 425, 208
USPQ 871, 881-882. (CCPA 1981). Here, based on the record
before us, we find that the Nagata reference teaches away from
combining Nagata with Nakagawa.
Accordingly, we will reverse the decision of the examiner
rejecting claims 13, 15-23 and 25 as being unpatentable under
35 U.S.C. § 103 over Nagata in view of Nakagawa.
Inoue in view of Moriwaki and Nakagawa
The applicant argues that the Moriwaki reference is
nonanalogous art. (Brief at 7). We agree for the following
reasons. "In order to rely on a reference as a basis for
rejection of the applicant's invention, the reference must
either be in the field of the applicant's endeavor or, if not,
then be reasonably pertinent to the particular problem with
which the inventor was concerned.” See In re Deminski, 796
F.2d 436, 442, 230 USPQ 313, 315 (Fed. Cir. 1986). In re
Oetiker, 977 F.2d 1443, 1447, 24 USPQ2d 1443, 1445 (1992).
The first inquiry is whether the Moriwaki reference is in
the field of applicant’s endeavor. The field of applicant’s
endeavor is a bearing assembly for a motor. Moriwaki
describes a bearing assembly not for a motor, but for what
9
Page: Previous 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007