Ex Parte Platteter et al - Page 2



          Appeal No. 2006-0621                                                        
          Application No. 09/938,237                                                  

          particular feature of the invention relates to the process for              
          maintaining synchronization between a master clock associated               
          with the marking engine and a slave clock associated with the               
          resource.                                                                   
          Representative claim 1 is reproduced as follows:                            
               1. A document processing system comprising:                            
               a marking engine that marks a sheet to form at least a                 
          portion of a document, the marking engine including a controller,           
          the controller including a master clock and logic for generating            
          a discrete clock synchronization interrupt signal;                          
               a resource that transfers the sheet to the marking engine or           
          receives the sheet from the marking engine, the resource                    
          including a slave clock related to operational timing of the                
          resource and circuitry for receiving and processing the discrete            
          clock synchronization interrupt signal; and                                 
               a control bus, interconnecting the resource and the                    
          controller, for distributing the discrete clock synchronization             
          interrupt signal.                                                           
          The examiner relies on the following references:                            
          Yamanaka et al. (Yamanaka)    4,807,259          Feb. 21, 1989              
          Cheung et al. (Cheung)        5,535,217          July 09, 1996              
          Miyawaki                      5,995,771          Nov. 30, 1999              
          Lackman et al. (Lackman)      6,343,351          Jan. 29, 2002              
          (filed Sep. 03, 1998)                                                       
          Shimoda et al. (Shimoda)      6,675,249          Jan. 06, 2004              
          (filed Dec. 27, 2000)                                                       
          Einbinder et al. (Einbinder)  6,704,302          Mar. 09, 2004              
          (filed Feb. 04, 1999)                                                       
          The following rejections are on appeal before us:                           
          1. Claims 1, 3, 6, 7, 10, 11 and 21 stand rejected under 35                 
          U.S.C. § 103(a) as being unpatentable over the teachings of                 
          Miyawaki in view of Yamanaka.                                               
                                          2                                           




Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  Next 

Last modified: November 3, 2007