Appeal No. 96-0067
Application 08/075,241
examiner finds in Liang "an interface means for encapsulating,"
citing column 6, line 45, et. seq. Lines 42 to 51 of column 6 of
Liang is reproduced below:
The system control processor 112 and the graphics
control processor 114 communicate through interrupts
and the communication areas described, above which are
stored in the system memory 113. The system control
processor will first initialize graphics control
processor 114 through general interface initialization.
This initialization includes establishment of all
interface control blocks. The SCP may next interrupt
the graphic control processor to start traversal and
may later stop traversal.
As the appellants correctly pointed out (Br. at 8), the cited
portions of Liang do not relate to data structure encapsulation.
If the examiner has interpreted data structure encapsulation to
mean something else, such other meaning has not been set forth or
explained. On this record, the examiner has failed to
demonstrate that Liang discloses the encapsulation feature of the
claimed invention.
For all of the foregoing reasons, the rejection of claims 1-
5, 9 and 10 over Liang cannot be sustained.
Dependent claims 6-8 and 11-14 have been rejected over the
combination of Liang and Lazansky. Lazansky has been relied on
by the examiner to meet the additional features recited in the
dependent claims (answer at 4). It has not been applied in a
manner, as explained by the examiner, which would cure the
-8-
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007