Appeal No. 1998-3342 Page 7
Application No. 08/540,943
invention is rendered obvious.” In re Fritch, 972 F.2d 1260,
1266, 23 USPQ2d 1780, 1784 (Fed. Cir. 1992) (citing In re
Gorman, 933 F.2d 982, 987, 18 USPQ2d 1885, 1888 (Fed. Cir.
1991)). “The 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.” Id. at 1266, 23 USPQ2d at
1784 (citing In re Gordon, 733 F.2d 900, 902, 221 USPQ 1125,
1127 (Fed. Cir. 1984)).
Here, Sasaki teaches, “[i]n both FIG. 2 and FIG. 3 a
first variable attenuator (ATT1) 4 is inserted between the
first stage amplifier 1 and the interstage circuit 2 and a
second variable
attenuator (ATT2) 5 is inserted between the interstage circuit
2 and last stage amplifier 3.” Col. 3, ll. 15-20. Although
ATT1 and ATT2 decrease or increase attenuation of signals, the
decrease or increase is not based on whether the reception
range
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007