Ex parte KONISHI et al. - Page 2




          Appeal No. 1998-0063                                                        
          Application No. 08/057,805                                                  


               Appellants' invention relates to a memory card device in               
          which a data relief area is created when and if a defective                 
          area, one into which data cannot be successfully written, is                
          detected in the storage area.  Claim 15 is illustrative of the              
          claimed invention, and it reads as follows:                                 
               15. A memory card device comprising:                                   
               a storage area divided into a plurality of space blocks,               
          each of said space blocks including a predetermined number of               
          memory cells; and                                                           
               a data control circuit which creates a data relief area                
          in said storage area if and when it detects that data can not               
          be successfully written into a defective area in said storage               
          area, said data control circuit creating said data relief area              
          by locating and identifying a predetermined number of space                 
          blocks in said storage area and writing data destined for said              
          defective area instead into said data relief area, said data                
          control circuit being operative such that said storage area                 
          contains no data relief areas before said defective area is                 
          detected.                                                                   
               The prior art reference of record relied upon by the                   
          examiner in rejecting the appealed claims is:                               
          Harari et al. (Harari)        5,297,148                Mar. 22,             
          1994                                                                        
               Claims 1 through 4 and 7 through 17 stand rejected under               
          35 U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable over Harari.                          
               Reference is made to the Examiner's Answer (Paper No. 26,              
          mailed July 17, 1997) for the examiner's complete reasoning in              
                                          2                                           





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

Last modified: November 3, 2007