Appeal No. 1997-0515
Application 08/350,504
73 F.3d 1085, 1087, 37 USPQ2d 1237, 1239 (Fed. Cir. 1995),
cert. denied, 519 U.S. 822 (1996) citing W. L. Gore & Assoc.,
Inc. v. Garlock, Inc., 721 F.2d 1540, 1548, 220 USPQ 303, 309
(Fed. Cir. 1983), cert. denied, 469 U.S. 851 (1984).
On pages 4 and 5 of the brief, Appellant argues that
the three references cited against claim 10 teach alternative
approaches to minimizing the short channel effect. These
alternative approaches are taught as alternatives and cannot
be
combined to result in the claim structure. Appellant argues
that the Examiner has selected various features of these
references out of context to find the claim structure through
hindsight
reconstruction. Appellant argues that there would have been
no incentive to combine the references to produce the claim
structure.
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
5
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007