Appeal No. 1997-2587
Application No. 08/078,864
addressing “any one of said logic circuitry....” Again, while
we understand the difference between the instant disclosed
invention and that disclosed by Green and we understand that
the counters of Green are addressed sequentially, it is our
view that the instant claimed subject matter is broader than
appellants would have us believe. Any time one of the
counters is being addressed, or instructed, by an adjacent
circuit, it can be said that one of the logic circuitry or
“any one of the logic circuitry” is being addressed. The
claim does not specify that any one of the circuits is
randomly addressed or that any one of the circuits can be
addressed at any given time and not in any particular
sequence. It recites the addressing of “any one” of the logic
circuits and, broadly speaking, whenever a counter in Green is
being instructed to load, that particular counter, at that
time, is “any one” of the logic circuitry.
Accordingly, we will sustain the rejections of claims 4
and 21.
We will not, however, sustain the rejection of claim 8
[under 35 U.S.C. § 102(b)] or claim 15 [under 35 U.S.C. § 103]
because these claims particularly recite that the addressable
7
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007