Appeal No. 2000-1449
Application No. 08/838,133
The question of whether Arona-Delonghi is non-analogous art as
urged by appellant (see, for example, pages 7-8 of the main brief)
is a threshold issue in considering the question of obviousness.
Arona-Delonghi pertains to caps for collapsible bottles and
containers that are manufactured to store products in liquid,
semi-liquid or viscous form, in which a tamperproof detachable
section is provided (see column 1, lines 6-8, and the abstract).
The cap of Arona-Delonghi comprises a first member T of plastic
material having on its lower part a locking rib 10 for locking the
first member to the neck of the bottle, and a second member 24
rotatably mounted to the top of the first member (column 2, line
48, through column 3, line 19). To dispense the product stored in
the container, the second member is rotated relative to the first
member to align openings in the first and second members to form an
exit orifice (column 2, lines 20-27).
In an obviousness determination under 35 U.S.C. § 103, art
which is non-analogous is too remote to be treated as prior art.
In re Clay, 966 F.2d 656, 658-59, 23 USPQ2d 1058, 1060 (Fed. Cir.
1992). There are two criteria for determining whether art is
analogous: (1) whether the art is from the field of the inventor’s
endeavor, regardless of the problem addressed, and (2) if the art
is not within the field of the inventor’s endeavor, whether it is
7
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007