Appeal No. 1999-2568
Application No. 08/640,096
disclosed therein are not configured as drivers, but as low
impedance paths to ground when they are gated on (column 1,
lines 39 through 52). As each of the gates is turned on, the
current from single driver 14 is diverted from the current
sensing device 15 to ground. Thus, we agree with the
appellants (reply brief, page 2) that “Belluche is incapable
of meeting the functional limitations” of the claims. The
anticipation rejection of claims 1 through 3, 7 and 8 is
reversed because of the lack of “a single trip propagation
delay” (claim 1), and “a plurality of drivers disposed along a
bus” (claim 7) in Belluche.
Turning lastly to the obviousness rejection of dependent
claims 2, 4 through 6, 9 and 10 based upon the sole teachings
of Belluche, this rejection is reversed for all of the reasons
that the anticipation rejection of claims 1 through 3, 7 and 8
was reversed.
7
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007