Ex parte GARIBAY et al. - Page 12

          Appeal No. 1997-0300                                                        
          Application 08/138,790                                                      

          This is illustrated in Table XII and Table XIII in columns 17               
          and 18.   We find that Table XII shows that the first write                 
          enters bytes A through D in one physical memory location, and               
          the second write                                                            

          stores bytes E through G in the second location.  As stated                 
          above, we find that Ardini teaches that using the buffer                    
          allows writes to contiguous memory locations to be merged into              
          one write to one memory location.  Thus, Ardini's system, when              
          presented with the writes shown in Shimp’s Table XII, would                 
          not make a misaligned write.  Rather, the data would be                     
          written as one seven bit write to one memory location.  Thus,               
          we find that Ardini does not suggest the desirability to add a              
          write buffer to Shimp’s system which writes across memory                   
          boundary.  Accordingly, we will not sustain the rejection                   
          under 35 U.S.C.  103 as being unpatentable over Shimp and                  
                    For the foregoing reasons, we reverse the rejection               
          of claims 11 to 24 under 35 U.S.C.  103.                                   


Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  13  14  Next 

Last modified: November 3, 2007