Appeal No. 1999-2398
Application No. 08/825,427
does not explicitly teach creating separately address and data
calculations in response to store operations,” but adds that
Matsuo discloses (Figure 26; column 12, lines 22 through 35)
address calculations performed by address calculation unit 24,
and data operations independently performed by data operation
unit 26 in response to general instructions. According to the
examiner (answer, page 4), general instructions “inherently
include store operations.” The examiner also acknowledges
(answer, page 5) that Matsuo does not explicitly teach
recombining the calculated address and data for dispatch to
memory as a single operation. For such a teaching of address
and data recombination before storage in memory, the examiner
turns to Popescu, and concludes that “[i]t would have been
obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the
invention to modify Matsuo in light of Popescu by combining
the results of address and data calculations for storage to
memory.”
Instead of challenging the proposed combination of
reference teachings, appellants have chosen to challenge the
examiner’s contentions concerning the sole teachings of Matsuo
4
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007