Appeal No. 95-4466
Application 08/135,188
(3) data to be acted on by said basic program instructions and
said application instructions;
(b) retrieving said subroutines from said auxiliary memory by:
(1) examining which common operation designation names of
application instructions have been entered in said step (a) and
(2) retrieving the subroutines which correspond to the entered
common operation designation names; and
(c) storing said retrieved subroutines into said main memory at a
higher memory location as compared to the sequence program
entered at step (a), wherein said retrieved subroutines are stored in
consecutive ascending addresses in order of retrieval from said
auxiliary memory;
further comprising a step (b) (3) of displaying a status of
whether said step (b) has been partially or fully completed.
The prior art reference of record relied upon by the Examiner in rejecting the
appealed claim is:
Griffin 4,866,663 Sep. 12, 1989
Claim 18 stands rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable over Griffin.
Rather than reiterate the conflicting viewpoints advanced by the Examiner and the
appellants, we make reference to the brief and answer for the details thereof.
OPINION
3
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007