Appeal No. 1996-1561 Page 8
Application No. 08/230,075
different system for insuring that sufficient water is supplied
to the bowl for refill after flushing does not alter the fact
that it discloses a restriction member at the end of the
flexible refill tube which meets the terms of claim 1, except
for the manner in which it is attached.
We also disagree with the appellant that Baird is
nonanalogous art (Brief, pages 6-7). The test for analogous
art is first whether the art is within the field of the
inventor's endeavor and, if not, whether it is reasonably
pertinent to the problem with which the inventor was involved.
See In re Wood, 599 F.2d 1032, 1036, 202 USPQ 171, 174 (CCPA
1979). A reference is reasonably pertinent if, even though it
may be in a different field of endeavor, it logically would
have commended itself to an inventor's attention in considering
his problem because of the matter with which it deals. See In
re Clay, 966 F.2d 656, 659, 23 USPQ2d 1058, 1061 (Fed. Cir.
1992). Baird is not directed to a water closet. However, it
is concerned with the problem of attaching a rigid flow-
through member to the end of a flexible hose and thus, from our
perspective, it logically would have commended itself to an
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007