Appeal No. 1995-3690 Page 10
Application No. 08/000,342
being anticipated by prior art in the background of the
specification.
A claim is anticipated only if each and every element as set
forth in the claim is found, either expressly or inherently
described, in a single prior art reference. Verdegaal Bros.
Inc. v. Union Oil Co., 814 F.2d 628, 631, 2 USPQ2d 1051, 1053
(Fed. Cir.), cert. denied, 484 U.S. 827 (1987). The inquiry
as to whether a reference anticipates a claim must focus on
what
subject matter is encompassed by the claim and what subject
matter is described by the reference.
The examiner reasons:
. . . that claimed inventions that are
taught in one publication, namely the
background section of the specification,
can be rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(b).
[examiner’s answer at page 6].
However, the background section of the application is not a
publication. In addition, the background section discusses
several methods of speculative execution of instructions.
However, the examiner does not explain which method discussed
in the background of the specification is the basis of the
rejection.
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007