Appeal No. 1999-1630
Application No. 08/784,775
make such a modification by some teaching or suggestion in the prior art or by some knowledge
possessed by the theoretical artisan skilled in the art.
The examiner contends that this reason is provided by Nagasawa’s teaching of reducing power
consumption and the artisan’s desire to reduce power consumption in APA. While that may be a
sufficient reason to make a modification, the examiner has not convinced us that Nagasawa’s use of
MOS transistors Q1-Q2 is what provides the power consumption reduction in Nagasawa.
It is appellant’s contention that Nagasawa does not use MOS transistors Q1-Q2 for the purpose of
reducing power consumption as suggested by the examiner. Instead, appellant suggests, Nagasawa’s
reduced power consumption is achieved by restraining the voltage applied to the constant current
source. We agree with appellant that column 4, lines 6-9, of Nagasawa provides for a voltage applied
to the constant current source to be restrained, “thereby reducing current consumption.” Since the
constant current sources are “designated by combinations Q5-Q7 resistors R1-R3” [column 2, lines
33-35, of Nagasawa], any part played by MOS transistors Q1-Q2 in reducing power consumption is
indirect and these transistors would need to be brought to APA along with other elements in order to
achieve the power consumption reduction achieved by Nagasawa. The examiner cannot bring only so
much of the prior art as is needed in order to construct the instant claimed subject matter, while leaving
other important elements of the prior art which work in tandem with the elements the examiner is
extracting. It would appear the only reason for doing so is hindsight gained from knowledge of
-5-
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007