Appeal No. 2001-0193 Page 5
Application No. 09/182,138
The mere fact that the prior art structure could be modified does not make such a
modification obvious unless the prior art suggests the desirability of doing so. See
In re Gordon, 733 F.2d 900, 902, 221 USPQ 1125, 1127 (Fed. Cir. 1984). Even
assuming, arguendo, that Pessina is analogous art, we fail to perceive any teaching,
suggestion or incentive in either reference which would have led one of ordinary skill in the
art to modify the Ahlgren system in the manner proposed by the examiner. Ahlgren
explicitly teaches that different motions, such as intermittent and slow, can be imparted to
rotating sign panels by the use of suitable gears, and provides no basis from which to
conclude there is a problem in the rotating sign art caused by abrupt accelerations or
decelerations in rotating the sign panels. From our perspective, the fact that problems
caused by abrupt acceleration and deceleration may exist in the single sheet feeding art
would not, in and of itself, provide motivation for one of ordinary skill in the rotating sign art
to utilize the drives disclosed by Pessina to overcome sheet feeding problems in sign
rotating mechanisms. Moreover, Pessina discloses two means for overcoming this
problems in sheet feeders, one being a gear drive and the other a cam and follower drive,
and the examiner has provided no reason why one of ordinary skill in the rotating sign art
would have selected the cam and follower drive over the gear drive, especially since gear
drives are used by Ahlgren. It is our view that the only suggestion for modifying the Ahlgren
sign drive in the manner proposed by the examiner is found in the hindsight afforded one
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007