Ex parte WALSH et al. - Page 4




               Appeal No. 96-4032                                                                                                    
               Application 08/054,496                                                                                                


               comprises:                                                                                                            

                       a main clock output means for providing said main clock signal to said associated circuit;                    

                       a clock signal input means for receiving an input clock signal having periodic logic state                    
               transitions;                                                                                                          

                       completion signal input means for receiving said completion signals from said associated circuit;             

                       means responsive to occurrence of a logic state transition of said input clock signal for causing a           
               logic state transition of said main clock signal, said responsive means further comprising logic means                
               responsive to receipt of a said completion signal indicating completion of actions performed in response              
               to a preceding logic state transition of said main clock signal, for delaying said transition of said logic           
               state of said main clock signal until receipt of said completion signal.                                              

                       The Examiner relies on the following references:                                                              

               Essig et al. (Essig)                           4,745,629                      May 17, 1988                            
               Sawtell                                        5,227,672                      July 13, 1993                           
                                                                                      (filed Mar. 31, 1992)                          

                       Claims 7 through 14 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C.§ 103 as being unpatentable over Sawtell                    

               in view of Essig.                                                                                                     

                       Rather than reiterate the arguments of Appellants and the Examiner, reference is made to the                  

               brief and answer for the respective details thereof.                                                                  

                                                            OPINION                                                                  

                       We will not sustain the rejection of claims 7 through 14 under 35 U.S.C. § 103.                               

                       The Examiner has failed to set forth a prima facie case of obviousness.  It is the burden of the              

               Examiner to establish why one having ordinary skill in the art would have been led to the claimed                     

                                                                 4                                                                   





Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  Next 

Last modified: November 3, 2007