Appeal No. 96-1919
Application 08/097,438
counter 18 does not count a number of detected events; at column 4, lines 9-14 and 58-62, the
reference discloses that counter 18 measures elapsed time and produces a clock count at the time when
trigger signals 34 are detected.
Even if Truchard counted a number of unprocessed, detected events, it has not been
established that it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the reference
by decrementing the unprocessed count by the value of a processed count. There is no teaching or
suggestion why one of ordinary skill in the art would have wanted to so modify Truchard. The
examiner has merely indicated that Truchard can be modified to provided decrementing. This would
have been inadequate to sustain the rejection. In re Fritch, 972 F.2d 1260, 1266, 23 USPQ2d 1780,
1783-84 (Fed. Cir. 1992).
As to claim 4, it has not been shown that Truchard teaches (1) a processor that generates a
plurality of increment signals by generating an increment signal in response to the processing of each
detected event and that generates a plurality of transmit signals by generating a transmit signal each time
a number of the detected events are processed or (2), a processed event counter that counts a number
of processed events by incrementing a processed count in response to each increment signal, that
transmits a plurality of processed count words by transmitting a processed count word which
represents the processed count in response to each transmit signal, and that resets the processed count
in response to the transmission of each processed count word. The examiner’s position is to the effect
that Truchard could have been modified by including such features. Again, that Truchard could have
5
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007