Different Automated Theorem Proving (ATP) systems solve different parts of different problems in different ways. Given a set of proofs produced by ATP systems based on adequately common principles, it is possible to create new proofs by combining proof components extracted from the proofs in the set. It is not generally easy to say that one of the original or new proofs is better or worse than another, but ways to show that two proofs are different are available. This paper describes a process of proof combination to form new proofs that are different from the original set of proofs.