Appeal No. 1999-1486
Application No. 08/670,806
to us that the Poe document would have been highly relevant
for its teaching of an alternative adjuster configuration in
addressing the adjustment problem faced by appellants.
Appellants focus upon the aircraft use by Poe, supra, in
considering the second part of the two-part test, reveals to
us that, in effect, appellants are inappropriately viewing the
second part of the test as if it were the first part of the
test, which it is not. For the above reasons, we conclude
that the Poe teaching logically would have commended itself to
an inventor's attention in considering the aforementioned
adjustment problem. Thus, while Poe may not be in appellants’
particular field of endeavor, i.e., a locking arrangement for
the hood of a motor vehicle, like the examiner (answer, page
4), we appreciate the teaching of Poe as reasonably pertinent
to the problem with which appellants were faced and,
therefore, conclude that it is analogous prior art.
to provide a locking arrangement of the
type generally described above by means of
which the movable vehicle body part can be
adjusted in a simple manner and at low time
expenditures with respect to the stationary
vehicle part. (italics added for emphasis)
8
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007