Appeal No. 1997-0837
Application 08/121,116
conversion element, the examiner has not provided a basis in fact
and/or technical reasoning to reasonably support that conclusion.
In re King, supra.
The examiner also takes the position to the effect that the
multiplexing circuits of Darling comprise a first switch coupled
to the output of each of a plurality of neuron MOSFETs for
selectively coupling each of the plurality of neuron MOSFETs to
the smoothed output of the image sensor. Although this may be the
case, it has not been shown that it is necessarily so. In re
King, supra. The examiner argues in his brief that a switch must
be provided by which output signals of the MOSFETs are made
available to “other circuits within the system which use the
output signals”. However, there is no disclosure regarding what
the “output multiplexing architecture” of Darling comprises, and
we are not convinced that the “other circuits” referred to by the
examiner comprise a smoothed output to which each of the plurality
of MOSFETs is selectively coupled.
Umeda, Holmes and Ingham, considered separately or together,
do not compensate for the shortcomings of Darling and Shibata.
Whereas the remaining claims depend from either claim 4 or
claim 15, the rejection of these claims will not be sustained.
5
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007