Appeal No. 1997-1188 Page 6
Application No. 08/035,969
In re Dembiczak, 175 F.3d 994, 999, 50 USPQ2d 1614, 1617 (Fed.
Cir. 1999).
The teachings of the applied prior art relied upon by the
examiner are set forth on pages 4-5 of the answer. After the
scope and content of the prior art are determined, the
differences between the prior art and the claims at issue are
to be ascertained. Graham v. John Deere Co., 383 U.S. 1,
17-18, 148 USPQ 459, 467 (1966).
Based on our analysis and review of Read and McNatt and
claim 17, it is our opinion that the differences are (1) a
controlled element, coupled to each of the seismic sensors,
for modifying the seismic signal produced by each seismic
sensor;
(2) a control, coupled to each controlled element, for
controlling the modifying of the seismic signal produced by at
least one set of a plurality of seismic sensors; and (3) at
least one combining element, each combining element being
coupled to an output of each of a plurality of the controlled
elements coupled to one of the plurality of sets of seismic
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007