Ex Parte Kent - Page 1




               The opinion in support of the decision being entered today was not written for publication and is                    
               not binding precedent of the Board.                                                                                  

                                  UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE                                                         
                                                           __________                                                               
                                        BEFORE THE BOARD OF PATENT APPEALS                                                          
                                                    AND INTERFERENCES                                                               
                                                           __________                                                               
                                                    Ex parte OSMAN KENT                                                             
                                                           __________                                                               
                                                      Appeal No. 2006-1687                                                          
               Application No. 10/086,980                                                                                           
                                                          ___________                                                               
                                                  HEARD: September 12, 2006                                                         
                                                          ___________                                                               
               Before HAIRSTON, JERRY SMITH, and MACDONALD, Administrative Patent Judges.                                           
               HAIRSTON, Administrative Patent Judge.                                                                               

                       This is an appeal from the final rejection of claims 1, 3 through 5 and 7 through 35.                        
                       The disclosed invention relates to a method and system for bypassing a defective one of a                    
               plurality of parallel graphics computational units, and distributing incoming tasks only among                       
               operative ones of the parallel graphics computational units.                                                         
                       Claim 1 is illustrative of the claimed invention, and it reads as follows:                                   
                       1. A graphics processor, comprising:                                                                         
                           a plurality of parallellized graphics computational units; and                                           
                           one or more task allocation units programmed to bypass defective ones of said units                      
                           within said groups, and to distribute incoming tasks only among operative ones of                        
                           said units .                                                                                             








Page:  1  2  3  4  5  Next 

Last modified: November 3, 2007