Appeal No. 96-1319
Application 07/934,982
from the collective teachings of Nicoud, Witt and Nusinov has a standard operating mode
and a smart operating mode, the mode determination does not modify the on-chip
processor in any manner as noted above. The collective teachings merely result in a smart
memory in which the processor is connected or not connected through an external pin such
as pin 2 of Nusinov. There is no suggestion that the processor itself can be directed to
start and stop executing instructions in response to an external lead or a predetermined
location in the processor memory. In our view, the connection or disconnection of the
processor through external pin 2 does not teach or suggest a memory location for causing
the processor to start and stop executing instructions. Therefore, we do not sustain the
rejection of claim 8.
Claims 9 and 10 recite a smart memory having either an external lead or a memory
location “for indicating completion of a task by said processor.” As noted above, the smart
memory resulting from the collective teachings of Nicoud, Witt and Nusinov would have a
plurality of external leads connected to external circuitry such as shown in Figure 3 of Witt.
We agree with the examiner that the DONE 321 lead of Witt would have suggested the
obviousness of a task completed lead as broadly recited in claim 9. With respect to claim
10, we again note that the artisan would have appreciated and recognized the
obviousness of maintaining status flag registers which indicate the current status of various
ones of the external leads. Therefore, we sustain the rejection of claims 9 and 10.
9
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007