Appeal No. 96-4088
Application 08/317,411
column 2, lines 29-67, Chin clearly discloses that their
invention is not concerned with data transmission but is
concerned with the use of parity signals to validate the
transmission of control signals across an I/O limited, high-
speed, bidirectional data transmission interface. Chin is not
concerned about using parity in the normal data transmission
in normal operation.
Appellant argues on pages 9 and 10 of the brief that
there is no basis to combine Sze and Chin. Appellant, in
particular, argues that Chin teaches that it is important to
provide error checking over control signals transferred
between a pair of data interface units, but Chin is not
attempting to perform data parity checking and furthermore
teaches away from bidirectional error checking. Appellant
argues that it is difficult to understand the Examiner's
contention that someone skilled in the art would be motivated
to combine a system for isolating malfunctioning units by
means of a single unidirec- tional error checking signal path
with Sze's serial loop parity checking system.
9
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007