Appeal No. 1999-1456
Application No. 08/864,750
wireless communication path to a remote industrial process
control field device. On page 7 of the brief, Appellants
argue that one would not have reason to employ Clark's
wireless communication path to access industrial control
process devices in a distributed control system of the
admitted prior art.
We note that Appellants' claim 2 recites "first and
second transceivers providing redundant two-way wireless
communications." Furthermore, we note that Appellants' claim
8 recites "a second wireless transceiver for connection to the
first and second industrial process control field devices, to
provide redundant two-way wireless communications."
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). It is further
established that "[s]uch a suggestion may come from the nature
5
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007