Appeal No. 96-2025
Application 07/860,254
with the positive and negative writing voltage, respectively,
to produce a symmetrical voltage waveform to the picture
elements. Inada shows in Figure 4, waveforms X2-Y1 and X2-Y2
in which the positive and negative pulses are different when
they are applied to the picture elements.
Furthermore, we fail to find any suggestion of modifying
Inada to provide a symmetrical voltage waveform as recited in
Appellants' claims 1 through 9. The Federal Circuit states
that "[t]he mere fact that the prior art may be modified in
the manner suggested by the 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, 312-13.
11
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007