Appeal No. 96-1119
Application 07/690,176
processor, for each master processor, through a slave
transmit/receive buffer in a memory shared by the master
processor and the slave processor; and
(c) using a tangible memory medium embodying the
computer program shown in FIGS. 5 through 182.
The examiner relies on the following references:
Fowler et al. (Fowler) 4,502,116 Feb. 26, 1985
Kneib 4,641,238 Feb. 3, 1987
Claims 2, 4, 6 and 8 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C.
§ 112, second paragraph, for failing to particularly point
out and distinctly claim the invention. Claims 2, 4, 6 and 8
also stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 101 as being directed to
nonstatutory subject matter. Finally, claims 2, 4, 6 and 8
stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 102(b). As evidence of
anticipation the examiner offers Kneib with respect to claims
2, 4 and 6 and Fowler with respect to claim 8.
Rather than repeat the arguments of appellants or the
examiner, we make reference to the briefs and the answer for
the respective details thereof.
OPINION
We have carefully considered the subject matter on
appeal, the rejections advanced by the examiner, the arguments
3
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007