Appeal No. 95-3388
Application 08/242,993
devices comprised of either a floating gate device, a
ferroelectric storage device, a ferromagnetic storage device,
an electrically erasable programmable read only memory
(EEPROM), an electrically programmable read only memory
(EPROM) or a flash floating gate memory. Upon a careful
review of Appellants' specification, we find that Appellants'
statements found on page 1 of the specification only admit
that DRAM, SRAM, EEPROM, EPROM, flash EEPROM are known, but do
not admit that one of ordinary skill in the art would have
reason to substitute these memory technologies with dynamic
random access memory technologies. Furthermore, we fail to
find any suggestion by Dhong to substitute these memory
technologies with the Dhong DRAM.
In addition, the Examiner has not shown that the
prior art suggested the desirability of the Examiner's
proposed modification. Furthermore, we fail to find that
Kawai supplies this missing teaching or suggestion.
Therefore, we find that the Examiner has failed to establish
why one having ordinary skill in the art would have been led
to the claimed invention by teachings or suggestions found in
7
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007