Appeal No. 1996-2369 Page 4
Application No. 08/191,723
outside-address detecting means for detecting
the address data of the first number of bits when
the address data of the first number of bits is
outside the addresses in the display space,
whereby the supply of incorrect address data to
the display means is prevented from causing said
undesirable display to be performed within said
display space.
Claim 1 stands rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 112 as
indefinite. Claims 1, 3, and 5-8 also stand rejected under 35
U.S.C. § 103 as obvious over the appellants’ admitted prior
art. Rather than repeat the arguments of the appellants or
examiner in toto, we refer the reader to the briefs and answer
for the respective details thereof.
OPINION
In reaching our decision in this appeal, we considered
the subject matter on appeal and the rejections and evidence
advanced by the examiner. Furthermore, we duly considered the
arguments of the appellants and examiner. After considering
the totality of the record, we are persuaded that the examiner
erred in rejecting claim 1 as indefinite. We are also
persuaded that the examiner erred in rejecting claims 1, 3,
and 5-8 as obvious. Accordingly, we reverse. Our opinion
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007