Appeal No. 1998-3003 Page 15
Application No. 08/589,621
Claims 2 through 4
The examiner determined (first Office action, pp. 4) that
Fuentes does not disclose varying the frequency or
duration of the pulses, but it would have been obvious to
vary the parameters to tailor the module to different
species of fish.
The appellants argue (brief, p. 5) that the examiner
"offers nothing in support of the conclusion that 'it would
have been obvious to vary the parameters to tailor the module
to different species of fish.'"
Evidence of a suggestion, teaching, or motivation to
modify a reference may flow from the prior art references
themselves, the knowledge of one of ordinary skill in the art,
or, in some cases, from the nature of the problem to be
solved, see Pro-Mold & Tool Co. v. Great Lakes Plastics, Inc.,
75 F.3d 1568, 1573, 37 USPQ2d 1626, 1630 (Fed. Cir. 1996),
Para-Ordinance Mfg. v. SGS Imports Intern., Inc., 73 F.3d
1085, 1088, 37 USPQ2d 1237, 1240 (Fed. Cir. 1995), although
"the suggestion more often comes from the teachings of the
pertinent references," In re Rouffet, 149 F.3d 1350, 1355, 47
Page: Previous 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007