Appeal 2007-0399
Application 09/961,024
We affirm the rejections.
ISSUE
The issue is whether Appellants have shown that the Examiner erred
in rejecting the claims under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a). The issue turns on whether
there is a legally sufficient justification for combining the disclosures of
Baker and Earnest for all the claims, and Holm for claim 35. Additional
issues address Appellants’ contention that the references do not disclose
claimed limitations of the invention.
FINDINGS OF FACT
Findings with respect to the rejection of claims 1 to 14, 16 to 18, 28 to
31, 33 to 44, and 49 under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a):
1. Appellants have invented a method and apparatus for
transmitting data between semiconductor chips on an internal
bus in a computer or related device, using multiple
communication interfaces with a plurality of transmit and a
plurality of receive channels coupled to bus interfaces to bear
the burden of transmitting and receiving data between the chips.
(Specification 1; claim 1). Stop and start message channels
control the flow of data to a receiving First In First Out buffer
device (FIFO), adapted to send a stop message to a source when
the FIFO reaches a stop threshold value, and send a start
message to the source when a start threshold value in the FIFO
is reached. (Specification 17 middle; claim 1)
separate argument with respect to those claims, they stand or fall with the
representative independent claim. See In re Young, 927 F.2d 588, 590, 18
USPQ2d 1089, 1091 (Fed. Cir. 1991). See also 37 C.F.R. § 41.37(c)(1)(vii).
5
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Next
Last modified: September 9, 2013