Appeal No. 1997-2382
Application 08/287,064
stream in reverse order as claimed. Appellant further argues
that neither Horowitz nor Gries provides a suggestion for
modifying Gries to provide a stack that is removed in reverse
order in order to provide direct encoding of a
macroinstruction into a subroutine address, or the generation
of an execution stream for storing subroutine addresses and
associated arguments as claimed.
The Federal Circuit states that "[t]he mere fact
that the prior art may be modified in the manner suggested by
the Examiner does not make the modification obvious unless the
prior art suggested the desirability of the modification." In
re Fritch, 972 F.2d 1260, 1266 n.14, 23 USPQ2d 1780, 1783-84
n.14 (Fed. Cir. 1992), citing In re Gordon, 733 F.2d 900, 902,
221 USPQ 1125, 1127 (Fed. Cir. 1984).
Upon our review of Horowitz and Gries, we fail to
find that this prior art suggests the modification of
providing direct encoding of a macroinstruction into a
subroutine address, or the generation of an execution stream
for storing subroutine addresses and associated arguments as
set forth in Appellant's claims.
7
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007