Appeal No. 1997-1183
Application No. 08/066,362
the left” using redundant number representations and that it is applicable to radix 4
representations. (See Kameyama at page 356, col. 1.) Appellants provide no other
evidence of unexpected results beyond the portion of the specification at page 7, lines 35-
40 to support the above argument. This argument is therefore not persuasive since the
prior art recognized the above elimination of carries with the sign redundant digit 4, 3 data.
With respect to Singh and Micheel, the Examiner relies upon each of these
references to teach/disclose the well-known use of devices having negative differential
resistance characteristics in logic circuits including summation functions. (See answer at
page 3.) (See Micheel at page 1, col. 1 and Singh at abstract.) Micheel discloses the use
of devices with negative differential resistance characteristics as beneficial for working
at very high speeds and low propagation delays. (See Micheel at page 1, col. 1 and Singh
at abstract.) Micheel further discloses the use of negative differential resistance devices
for use in multiple valued logic. (See Micheel at abstract.) The Examiner maintains that it
would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to
combine the signed digit adder using at least one device which exhibits negative
differential resistance as set forth in the language of claim 1. (See answer at page 3.) We
agree with the Examiner.
As pointed out by our reviewing court, we must first determine the scope of the
claim. "[T]he name of the game is the claim." In re Hiniker Co., 150 F.3d 1362, 1369,
5
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007