Appeal No. 96-0067 Application 08/075,241 examiner finds in Liang "an interface means for encapsulating," citing column 6, line 45, et. seq. Lines 42 to 51 of column 6 of Liang is reproduced below: The system control processor 112 and the graphics control processor 114 communicate through interrupts and the communication areas described, above which are stored in the system memory 113. The system control processor will first initialize graphics control processor 114 through general interface initialization. This initialization includes establishment of all interface control blocks. The SCP may next interrupt the graphic control processor to start traversal and may later stop traversal. As the appellants correctly pointed out (Br. at 8), the cited portions of Liang do not relate to data structure encapsulation. If the examiner has interpreted data structure encapsulation to mean something else, such other meaning has not been set forth or explained. On this record, the examiner has failed to demonstrate that Liang discloses the encapsulation feature of the claimed invention. For all of the foregoing reasons, the rejection of claims 1- 5, 9 and 10 over Liang cannot be sustained. Dependent claims 6-8 and 11-14 have been rejected over the combination of Liang and Lazansky. Lazansky has been relied on by the examiner to meet the additional features recited in the dependent claims (answer at 4). It has not been applied in a manner, as explained by the examiner, which would cure the -8-Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 NextLast modified: November 3, 2007