Appeal No. 1999-2274
Application No. 08/811,787
In the instant case, Allport is clearly not in appellant’s field of endeavor since the
instant claimed subject matter is directed to an energy discriminating radiation detector
in an imaging system (though some claims do not have an imaging limitation) while Allport
is directed to thickness gauging. There is no imaging application suggested by Allport
and even though the examiner suggests that the Allport detectors “could be used to form
an image,” we agree with appellant that this is not the standard for the determination of
whether a reference is within appellant’s field of endeavor.
Since Allport is clearly not within appellant’s field of endeavor, we look to see if
Allport is at least reasonably pertinent to the problem appellant was attempting to solve.
We find that Allport is not reasonably pertinent. In accordance with Clay, we must look to
the purposes of the invention and the prior art in order to determine whether the reference
is reasonably pertinent to the problem the invention attempts to solve. Again, since Allport
is directed to thickness gauging and the instant invention is directed to energy
discrimination radiation detectors for imaging, it does not appear that the skilled artisan
would have had any reason to look to Allport for help in solving the problem of radiation
imaging or of enhancing the image of particular types of materials
4
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007