Appeal No. 1997-0274
Application No. 08/266,912
charge pump of Ito to obtain the expected result of providing a regulated signal with a
variable duty cycle thereto.” (See answer at page 4.) The Examiner further
embellishes the above motivation statement by stating that the modification would
provide “a combination having the expected additive result of a highly regulated clock
signal with variable duty cycle being provided to the charge pump. Such advantage will
provide greater control and stability of the level of the voltage provided at Vout” (See
answer at page 5.) (Emphasis added.) Appellants argue that the Examiner has not
provided a “teaching or even a suggestion in either the Ito patent or the Tatsumi patent to
combine them into applicants’ advantageous combination.” (See brief at page 9.)
Appellants further argue the lack of an adequate motivation to combine the references.
Appellants argue that no reasonable suggestion exists in the prior art to point the way to
the modification as set forth by the Examiner. (See brief at page 8.) We agree with
appellants that the prior art references do not disclose or suggest an adequate motivation
to combine the teachings.
Appellants argue that “their claimed arrangement does not just ‘merely’ increase
the frequency, but it takes advantage of the insight that the one capacitor of the single
charge pumping circuit can be operated more effectively in response to the selected
6
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007