Appeal No. 2003-0440
Application No. 09/430,162
Regarding claims 5 and 15, since the claims are dependent
upon claims 2 and 12, respectively, with all of the limitations
thereof, and the examiner relies on only Vicard and Hong with no
additional evidence, the rejection includes the same deficiencies
discussed supra. Accordingly, we cannot sustain the rejection of
claims 5 and 15.
As to claims 8, 9, 18, and 19, Crump fails to remedy the
shortcomings of Vicard and Hong. Specifically, Crump teaches
(column 3, line 62-column 4, lines 3 and 29-33) that the computer
system is split into media console 16 and separate system 18 and
that the central processing unit and the video/graphics subsystem
are both in system unit 18. Therefore, we cannot sustain the
rejection of claims 8, 9, 18, and 19. Booth also fails to cure
the deficiencies of Vicard and Hong. Thus, we cannot sustain the
rejection of claim 32.
6
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007