Appeal No. 2003-1371 Page 7
Application No. 09/186,856
from the same field of endeavor, regardless of the problem addressed, and (2) if the
reference is not within the field of the inventor's endeavor, whether the reference still is
reasonably pertinent to the particular problem with which the inventor is involved." Id. at
658-59, 23 USPQ2d at 1060 (citing In re Deminski, 796 F.2d 436, 442, 230 USPQ 313,
315 (Fed. Cir. 1986); In re Wood, 599 F.2d 1032, 1036, 202 USPQ 171, 174 (CCPA
1979)).
Although "the diverse Patent [and Trademark] Office classification of the
references to be some evidence of 'non-analogy,'" In re Ellis, 476 F.2d 1370, 1372, 177
USPQ 526, 527 (CCPA 1973), "[s]uch evidence is inherently weak," In re Mlot-
Fijalkowski, 676 F.2d 666, 669 n.5, 213 USPQ 713, 715-16 n.5 (CCPA 1982), and "is of
limited value." Id., 213 USPQ 713, 715-16 n.5. We consider the aforementioned
criteria to carry greater weight.
Here, regarding the first criterion, because the appellants' invention is "[a]n
electronic game for multiple . . . players," (Spec. at 47), it is from the field of electronic
games. For its part, Curchod discloses a "golf simulator system which . . . increases
the speed at which two or more golfers can together play a simulated round of golf."
Col. 2, ll. 20-24. Because the reference's simulator is electronic and enables golfers to
play an electronic game of golf, Curchod is also from the field of electronic games.
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007