Appeal No. 95-3920
Application No. 08/151,938
claimed invention. Carter was employed by the examiner merely
to suggest to artisans that there are hardware implementations
for operating on a system clock when peripherals have been
inactive for a predetermined time. We believe that a hardware
implementation of what is shown in Watts would have been
obvious, by itself, to artisans, Carter being merely
cumulative to what is already shown by Watts with regard to
the instant claimed invention.
We find no convincing arguments by appellant in this
record as to why Watts would not be applicable to the instant
claimed subject matter in the manner applied by the examiner.
Accordingly, the examiner’s decision is affirmed.
No time period for taking any subsequent action in
connection with this appeal may be extended under 37 CFR
§ 1.136(a).
AFFIRMED
7
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007