Appeal No. 96-4169
Application 08/378,066
Examiner does not make the modification obvious unless the
prior art suggested the desirability of the modification." In
re Fritch, 972 F.2d 1260, 1266 n.14, 23 USPQ2d 1780, 1783-84
n.14 (Fed. Cir. 1992), citing In re Gordon, 733 F.2d 900, 902,
221 USPQ 1125, 1127 (Fed. Cir. 1984). "Obviousness may not be
established using hindsight or in view of the teachings or
suggestions of the inventor." Para-Ordnance Mfg., 73 F.3d at
1087, 37 USPQ2d at 1239, citing W. L. Gore, 721 F.2d at 1551,
1553, 220 USPQ at 311, 312-313.
Upon our review of the references relied upon by the
Examiner, we fail to find any suggestion or reason to modify
the Raasch system so as to allow the host computer not to
control the independent control circuit. In column 1 of
Raasch, lines 5-14, Raasch teaches that their invention
relates to facilitating control within Industrial Standard
Architecture (ISA). Specifically, the invention involves a
peripheral controller which emulates the functions of
conventional peripheral controllers and interrupt controllers
within the peripheral controller which generates internal
interrupts in response to a number of devices connected to the
7
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007