Ex parte WALKER - Page 7

          Appeal No. 1999-1042                                       Page 7           
          Application No. 08/781,220                                                  

          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).  Kroon clearly is not within the field of the                        
          appellant’s endeavor in that it is directed to a cluster office             
          work station system and not to the supply of medical gas                    
          services or the like.  As for the second facet of the Wood                  
          test, while Kroon illustrates an arrangement of work stations               
          that surround a five-sided central column, it has nothing to do             
          with providing a stand-alone column which does not impede the               
          movement of workers around it while maximizing the supply of                
          utilities that can be provided therethrough, and thus in our                
          view would not logically have commended itself to the attention             
          of an inventor working on the problem to which the appellant’s              
          invention is directed.  Therefore, Kroon is non-analogous art               
          and the first two rejections are fatally defective at the                   
               Moreover, even considering, arguendo, the Kroon reference              
          to be analogous art, the mere fact that it discloses a five-                
          sided column through which utilities are supplied would not, in             
          our view, have suggested to one of ordinary skill in the art                

Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  13  14  15  Next 

Last modified: November 3, 2007