Appeal No. 96-3494
Application 08/160,299
performed only on the first and second inputs and on the first
and third inputs [answer, pages 4-5]. The examiner cites
Vassiliadis to teach an ALU which performs mixed arithmetic
and logical operations on any two inputs of a three input ALU.
The examiner also explains why it would have been obvious to
the artisan to replace the Chu ALU with the Vassiliadis ALU.
In our view, the examiner has at least presented a prima facie
case of the obviousness of claim 1. Therefore, we consider
appellants’ arguments and the relative persuasiveness of the
arguments.
Appellants’ first argument is that Chu does not teach
the claimed ALU for performing the operations A±B and A±C as
recited in claim 1. The examiner has acknowledged this
deficiency in Chu which is why the reference was combined with
Vassiliadis. Appellants argue that Vassiliadis also does not
provide this teaching because Vassiliadis teaches that two
operand ALU functions are achieved by forcing one input to
zero [brief, page 7]. According to appellants, claim 1
recites that the ALU combinations are achieved by control of
the function of the ALU and not by forcing one input to zero.
9
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007