Appeal No. 1996-3287
Application 08/226,472
examiner has not discussed the operation of Nomura to demonstrate that the claimed functions
associated with these means are in fact performed by the circuitry of Nomura. In other words, a data
skipping means in Nomura, for example, does not anticipate the claimed data skipping means unless it
performs the function recited in the claim for that means.
We have considered the operation of Nomura and cannot specifically find that the claimed
functions performed by the data skipping means, data skipping timing change means, and the address
formation means are present in the Nomura disclosure. As we noted above, although the claimed
invention is similar to the Nomura device, the position that Nomura performs the functions recited in
claims 1 and 4 is based on pure speculation. Therefore, for us to affirm the rejection, we would have to
use needless speculation, which we decline to do. Deficiencies in the factual basis cannot be supplied
by resorting to speculation or unsupported generalities. In re Freed, 425 F.2d 785, 165 USPQ 570
(CCPA 1970); In re Warner, 379 F.2d 1011, 154 USPQ 173 (CCPA 1967).
5
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007