Appeal No. 1999-0859
Application No. 08/330,972
Examiner’s rejections “...are based on assembling a number of
prior art references and attempting to modify their teachings to
purportedly show that the combination of these teachings would
have rendered appellant’s combination of circuit elements
obvious.”
After careful review of the applied prior art references in
light of the arguments of record, we are in agreement with
Appellant’s position as stated in the Briefs. In our view, the
Examiner has combined the general teachings of three references
related to image attenuating mixers in some vague manner without
specifically describing how the teachings would be combined.
This does not persuade us that one of ordinary skill in the art
having the references before her or him, and using her or his
own knowledge of the art, would have been put in possession of
the claimed subject matter.
A review of the Examiner’s analysis in the Answer reveals
that the Examiner has never attempted to show how each of the
claimed limitations is suggested by the teachings of the applied
prior art. Further, other than the fact that the Gorrie and Oto
references are related to frequency selection, the Examiner’s
statement of the grounds of rejection is lacking in any
6
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007