Appeal No. 97-2120
Application No. 08/226,164
The examiner has concluded (Answer, page 5) that:
The difference between [the] claimed invention
and this reference lies in the claim recitation that
the CO includes vibrator system harmonics which are
passed by the inverse filter. However, the skilled
artisan would find it obvious that seismic land
vibrators driven by frequency varying sine waves
inherently produce harmonics which are passed by
inverse filter (54).
In response to appellant’s argument (Brief, pages 6 and 7)
that Martinez lacks an inverse filter with a passband that
will pass harmonics, the examiner concludes (Answer, pages 6
and 7) that “inverse filters are by definition filters with
characteristics complementary to another filter so that when
used in series with the other filter no frequency-selective
filtering occurs.”
Nothing in the record before us supports the examiner’s
conclusion that the inverse filtering performed by Martinez
will pass harmonics with the reflected signal. In the absence
of evidence in the record, and the lack of a convincing line
of reasoning by the examiner demonstrating how the inverse
filtering performed by Martinez passes harmonics, the
obviousness rejection of claims 3 through 6, 9, 11 and 12 is
reversed.
6
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007