Appeal No. 96-4002
Application No. 08/121,849
merely as evidence that integration of a signal over a
predetermined time span will provide an indication of the
energy content of such signal. As Appellant has asserted
(Brief, page 13), this is a mere statement of a mathematical
principle which is not in dispute. In our opinion, the
teachings of Baumoel do not solve the deficiencies of the
Examiner’s proposed combination of Leszczynski and Snyder.
Baumoel is not concerned with echo discrimination and,
further, Baumoel’s disclosed summation of all of the reflected
signals to measure rate of decay does not provide a teaching
of energy content determination of a particular echo.
We further agree with Appellant’s arguments that the
Examiner has failed to provide proper motivation for the
proposed combination of Leszczynski, Snyder, and Baumoel. It
is our view that, even assuming arguendo that Snyder and
Baumoel provide for echo energy content determination, no
motivation exists for modifying Leszczynski in the manner
suggested by the Examiner. The Examiner’s position that the
desire for cost reduction would lead the skilled artisan to
modify Leszczynski to utilize digital integrated circuity such
as in Snyder and Baumoel is inapposite since the existing
7
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007