Appeal No. 95-4084
Application 07/992,648
obvious to modify Yamaki in light of the teachings of Garrett, we
fail to see how Garrett's cycle steal sequencer "would increase
the throughput of the Yamaki et al. system" (Answer, page 4)
since Garrett halts the signal processor 63 "for no more than
four machine cycles" (column 19, lines 24 through 28). The
halting of the signal processor in Garrett coupled with Yamaki's
muting of the sound would certainly decrease, as opposed to
increase, the throughput of the Yamaki system. Thus, we agree
with appellants that "the cycle steal sequencer of Garrett fails
to satisfy the 'read cycle steal' feature of claim 1, which, by
definition, operates without interrupting production of DSP
output signals" (Reply Brief, pages 5 and 6). The obviousness
rejection of claims 1 and 2 is reversed.
6
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007