Appeal No. 1996-3193
Application 08/160,112
The Examiner points to column 14, lines 52-65, for the
teaching of subtraction (Paper No. 5, page 4), which teaching
Appellants fail to address.
Taniguchi, as modified in light of the Examiner's finding
of well known prior art discussed previously would
conditionally either add (X-Y) to the running sum of absolute
values of the differences at the output if (X-Y) was positive
or would add -(X-Y) to the running sum of absolute values of
the differences at the output if (X-Y) was negative. One of
ordinary skill in the art of computer arithmetic would have
recognized that adding -(X-Y) is subtracting (X-Y).
For these reasons, we conclude that the Examiner has
presented sufficient evidence and argument to establish a
prima facie case of obviousness. The rejection of claims 1,
3, and 4 is sustained.
Group II - Claim 5
Claim 5 recites "storing any carry output" from the step
of conditionally adding or subtracting the difference to a
running sum of the absolute values of the differences, "adding
said carry output to a running sum of carry outputs," and
"adding said running sum of carry outputs to said running sum
- 12 -
Page: Previous 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007