Appeal No. 1996-3541
Application 08/275,307
would have been prima facie in the form of a static RAM since such were well-known in the
art well before the filing date of appellant's application. Such programmable controllers
were also well-known to encompass their own execution units for executing ladder diagram
sequencing operations to control specific devices. In accordance with Andersen's
teachings and showings, the integrated circuit element 14 comprises the claimed
programming and/or interface means between the personal computer 10 and the
programmable controller 12. Since the computer 10 is specifically identified as
comprising a personal computer, it obviously would have been embodied in the form of a
microprocessor as set forth, for example, in dependent claim 24. Appellant's own
specification at page 8, lines 2 and 3 indicates that the static random access memory 14
that he utilized is well-known in the art. As such, such devices are well-known not to retain
information stored therein when operating power is removed as recited in dependent
claims 31 and 32. To complement this rejection, the examiner is expected to consider the
programmable controller art in class 700 beginning at subclass 11 in considering any
additional rejections to the dependent claims as well as embellishing upon this rejection
we have made.
6
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007