Appeal No. 1997-0583
Application 08/368,680
and slave sample and hold circuits are merely specific delays.
These two references are not of record for this appeal and are
not considered here.
We find nothing in Lish that resembles the configuration
claimed in claim 1. In addition to the above limitation, Lish
does not show the limitations: “a plurality of multipliers,
each ... coefficient” (instant claim, lines 2 to 4) and “a
plurality of multiplexers, each ... coupled to ... slave
circuits” (instant claim, lines 13 to 16). The Examiner has
not provided any specific arguments to the contrary.
Therefore, we cannot sustain the obviousness rejection of
claim 1 over Lish. For the same
reasons, we cannot sustain over Lish the obviousness rejection
of claims 2 to 14 which depend on claim 1.
Next, we consider the independent method claim 15. It
contains the limitations which correspond to those discussed
above, namely, “supplying ... coefficient signals ... output”
(instant claim, lines 2 to 3), “coupling an input signal to a
master input of a master sample and hold circuit” (instant
claim, lines 4), “directly connecting a master output ...
-6-
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007