Appeal No. 96-0908
Application 08/160,118
The same argument is made with respect to the combination of
Kawata and Diefendorff (Br22). The examiner's response is
(EA12): "The examiner submits that Auslander clearly teaches
that multiple conditional operations can be executed in
sequence, each operation utilizes different conditional bits."
This reasoning does not address the claim limitations to the
write instruction. None of the references disclose or suggest
a conditional write instruction as claimed. The examiner has
failed to establish a prima facie case of obviousness over
either Auslander or Kawata in view of Diefendorff. The
rejections of claim 11 and 23, and their dependent claims 12
and 24, over Auslander and Diefendorff and Kawata and
Diefendorff are reversed.
- 25 -
Page: Previous 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007