Appeal No. 1999-0466
Application 08/530,617
memory [answer, pages 4-5].
Appellants argue that claim 1 recites that the system
memory location is accessed by the system controller via the
display controlling means. Appellants argue that although
Wingine shows a separate system controller and graphics
controller, Wingine does not teach the sharing of a single
physical memory between display memory and system memory.
Appellants also argue that although Kelleher teaches the
sharing of a single physical memory, Kelleher does not provide
a separate controller. Finally, appellants argue that the
prior art teachings would not have motivated the artisan to
modify Wingine so that system accesses to VRAM would occur
through the Wingine controller as asserted by the examiner
[brief, pages 3-4].
The examiner responds that appellants are pointing out
individual deficiencies in the references to attack teachings
for which they are not being relied on. The examiner also
argues that there is clear motivation for combining the
teachings of Wingine and Kelleher and that the combined system
teaches the use of a system memory controller requesting
access to the shared VRAM through the graphics controller
6
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007