Appeal No. 97-0320
Application No. 08/096,261
persuaded that the structure disclosed by Mizuno would not be
considered equivalent. Clearly, the data serialization
process required by the serial port connection in Mizuno would
necessarily include appropriate logic and timing circuitry.
In a related argument, Appellant asserts (Brief, page 18;
Reply Brief, page 8) that Mizuno provides only for the
rewriting of defective memory cells from the external computer
17 through the serial port to the memories but has no
disclosure of defective memory cell information being output
through the serial port to the external computer. In
response, the Examiner argues (Answer, page 6) that the
defective memory cell information required by the external
computer 17 in Mizuno to rewrite the defective memories must
be output to the computer through the serial port since no
other connection is shown. After careful review of
Appellant's arguments and the Mizuno reference, we are in
agreement with the Examiner. In our view, the conclusion that
Mizuno's computer 17 receives required information from any
other source or connection other than that shown is not
supported by any showing by Appellant. For the above reasons,
the Examiner's rejection of claim 1 under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as
12
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007