Appeal No. 1997-2160
Application No. 07/548,709
instruction is useable by both processors or if both processors are required to perform the same
operation identified in an instruction” [Page 8-principal answer]. However, the examiner has provided
no evidence of what instruction sets of Yamazaki overlap or might overlap, as claimed. Accordingly,
we will not sustain the rejection of claim 28 under 35 U.S.C. § 103 based on the evidence provided by
the examiner.
We have sustained the rejection of claims 26, 27 and 29 under 35 U.S.C. § 103 but we have
not sustained the rejection of claims 1 through 9, 22, 23, 28 and 30 under 35 U.S.C. § 103.
Accordingly, the examiner’s decision is affirmed-in-part.
No time period for taking any subsequent action in connection with this appeal may be extended
under 37 C.F.R. § 1.136(a).
AFFIRMED-IN-PART
ERROL A. KRASS )
Administrative Patent Judge )
)
)
)
LEE E. BARRETT ) BOARD OF PATENT
Administrative Patent Judge ) APPEALS AND
) INTERFERENCES
)
)
ANITA PELLMAN GROSS )
Administrative Patent Judge )
JOHN J. FELDHAUS
7
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007