Appeal No. 96-1422
Application 08/048,339
have little relevance to the subject matter set forth in
independent claims
6 and 12 on appeal.
The lack of relevance of the combined teachings of both
references is so apparent that we find ourselves in complete
agreement with appellants’ position set forth at page 14 of
the brief on appeal:
In In re Deminski, 796 F.2d 436 (Fed. Cir. 1986)
the Federal Circuit adopted a “two-step test” for
determining whether particular references are within
the appropriate scope of the art. First, it must be
determined whether the reference is “within the
field of the inventor’s endeavor.” If it is outside
that field, it must be determined whether the
reference is “reasonably pertinent to the particular
problem with which the inventor was involved.” It
is submitted that technology relating to minimizing
the quantity of data sent from a host processor to a
terminal is outside the field of Appellants’
invention which is a method for reducing the size of
a control store in a micro-programmed pipelined
processor. It is also submitted that the problems
solved by the references relied upon by the Examiner
have no relevance to the problems solved by
Appellants. The teachings of Berk and Harper are
not reasonably pertinent, and thus, are non-
analogous art.
5
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007