Appeal No. 2002-0701
Application 09/201,269
The appellant argues that Campbell is nonanalogous art
(brief, page 24). The test of whether a reference is from an
analogous art is first, whether it is within the field of the
inventor's endeavor, and second, if it is not, whether it is
reasonably pertinent to the particular 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 is
one which, because of the matter with which it deals, logically
would have commended itself to an inventor’s attention in
considering the inventor’s problem. See In re Clay, 966 F.2d
656, 659, 23 USPQ2d 1058, 1061 (Fed. Cir. 1992). Cleary’s
disclosure of a polymer that can be used as either a printing ink
vehicle or a coating (col. 8, lines 48-56) indicates that
1) Campbell’s polymer which is useful for making coatings
(col. 8, lines 43-44) is within the appellant’s field of endeavor
of making printing ink vehicles and, 2) because of the matter
with which Campbell deals, Campbell logically would have
commended itself to the appellant’s attention in considering the
appellant’s problem. Campbell, therefore, is analogous art.
18
Page: Previous 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007