Appeal No. 97-2020
Application 07/957,107
mankind, in particular, inventors, strive to improve that
which already exists. Pro-Mold and Tool Co. v. Great Lakes
Plastics, Inc., 75 F.3d 1568, 1573, 37 USPQ2d 1626, 1629-30
(Fed. Cir. 1996).
Appellants' argument that a suggestion to modify the
prior art to produce the claimed invention is not expressly
stated in the art applied against the claims is unpersuasive.
An express suggestion is not necessary. B.F. Goodrich Co. v.
Aircraft Braking Sys. Corp., 72 F.3d 1577, 1582, 37 USPQ2d
1314, 1318 (Fed. Cir. 1996). Appellants' other argument, that
the prior art is silent with respect to the problem which is
addressed in its invention is also unpersuasive. The law does
not require that references be combined for the reason
contemplated by the inventor. In re Beattie, 974 F.2d 1309,
1312, 24 USPQ2d 1040, 1042 (Fed. Cir. 1992). Lastly,
appellants have not established that one of ordinary skill in
the art, after reading (1) De Jule and its teaching of
utilizing amplitude modulated signals, width modulated
signals, and a combination of amplitude and width modulated
17
Page: Previous 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007