Ex parte CAROL E. BASSETT - Page 3




          Appeal No. 95-4957                                                          
          Application 07/950,979                                                      


          microprocessor, wherein data is obtained from the system memory             
          at the data storage locations accessed by the second addresses              
          and a data storage location accessed by the first host address              
          and wherein the control signals include latching control signals            
          which control latching of the plurality of bidirectional latching           
          transceivers whereby data is latched from the plurality of system           
          memory data busses directly to the host bus.                                

          The examiner relies on the following reference:                             
          Kronstadt et al. (Kronstadt)     4,725,945       Feb. 16, 1988              
          In the final rejection, some of the pending claims were                     
          rejected under 35 U.S.C.  102(b), and the remaining claims were            
          rejected under 35 U.S.C.  103.  In the examiner’s answer, the              
          examiner withdrew the rejection of the claims under Section 102,            
          and the examiner indicated that all the pending claims were now             
          rejected on a single basis under Section 103.  Consequently,                
          claims 1-6, 8, 10-19, 22, 24, 27-29, 34 and 35 now stand rejected           
          under 35 U.S.C.  103.  As evidence of obviousness the examiner             
          offers Kronstadt taken alone.                                               
          Rather than repeat the arguments of appellants or the                       
          examiner, we make reference to the briefs and the answers for the           
          respective details thereof.                                                 
          OPINION                                                                     
          We have carefully considered the subject matter on                          
          appeal, the rejection advanced by the examiner and the evidence             
          of obviousness relied upon by the examiner as support for the               
                                          3                                           





Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  13  Next 

Last modified: November 3, 2007