Appeal No. 94-3790
Application 08/032,758
reference to the subject matter of independent claim 21 on
appeal. The examiner repeatedly indicated in the answer that
appellant read too much into the language of independent claim
21 and we repeated as much at page 7 of our original opinion.
Furthermore, appellant has not given any recognition of the
paragraph bridging pages 10 and 11 of our original opinion
which indicates in another form the breadth of the claim
language recited in independent claim 21.
The questioned language is reproduced at the bottom of
page 3 and the top of page 4 of our original opinion. It
states (emphasis added):
and a delay means which propagates said
input clock signal from said input terminal
to an output terminal such that said first
type signal edges are delayed independent
of said second type edges between said
input and output terminals for a time
interval which is varied in continuous
fashion by the magnitude of said control
signal.
We stated at page 8 of our original opinion the
following (emphasis added):
The above quoted delay means clause
says nothing about the first type signal
edges being delayed independently of any
4
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007