Appeal No. 96-0950
Application No. 07/727,932
means for performing function (2) from Katzman. Appellants argue
that Quinquis lacks means for performing either function and that
the examiner has failed to indicate where the prior art suggests
the desirability of adding the recited features to Quinquis as
required under In re Fritch, 972 F.2d 1260, 1266 n.14, 23 USPQ2d
1780, 1783-84 n.14 (Fed. Cir. 1992). Reply Brief at 2. We agree
with appellants.
1. Means For Checking a Number of Data On a Data Bus
According to the examiner, the recited means for checking is
satisfied by Quinquis checking whether the occupation bus is a
“1" or a “0.” Examiner’s Answer at 6. Appellants argue that
Quinquis does not check a number of the data being transferred on
the data bus. Appeal Brief at 7. We agree with appellants.
Even under the broadest reasonable interpretation of the
recited means, we unable to say that checking whether the
occupation bus is a “1" or a “0” constitutes checking a number of
data on the data bus. Even if checking for a “1" or a “0"
constituted checking a number of data on a bus, Quinquis checks
for a “1" or a “0" on the occupation bus, not the data bus as
required by the claims. Column 4, line 65 through column 5, line
2. Although the state of the occupation bus is intended to
reflect whether or not the data bus is occupied, Quinquis does
6
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007