Appeal No. 96-2820
Application 08/227,705
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. v. SGS
Importers Int’l, 73 F.3d at 1087, 37 USPQ2d at 1239, citing W.
L. Gore & Assocs., Inc. v. Garlock, Inc., 721 F.2d at 1551,
220 USPQ at 311.
Even though Childers teaches memories of unequal
size, it does not locate the sense amplifier between those
memories. The secondary references teach locating a sense
amplifier between memories of equal size to average the
capacitance and speed sense times. The secondary references
do not teach or suggest to one of ordinary skill in the art,
to locate a sense amplifier between memories of unequal size.
Since there is no evidence in the record that the prior art
suggested the desirability of locating a sense amplifier
9
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007