Ex parte QUINLAN - Page 4

              Appeal No. 1997-1271                                                                                     
              Application 08/294,765                                                                                   

              distributed memories and processors into the cache-based system of Bennett.  By the                      
              examiner's own admission in the statement of the rejection, Bennett alone is deficient to                
              meet the subject matter of the claims on appeal.  The same may be said of Keryvel alone.                 
              The examiner's rationale to combine the teachings of Keryvel into Bennett's system are                   
              simplistic, speculative, and unpersuasive.  The rationale and further explanation of the                 
              examiner in the responsive arguments portion of the principal answer and the                             
              supplemental answer do not appear to us to be prospective in nature from the combined                    
              teachings and suggestions of the references, but based on prohibited hindsight.  The                     
              architectural nature of the references individually are so discontinuous as to lead the                  
              artisan to merely speculate as to their combinability.                                                   
                     On the other hand, assuming for the sake of argument that the references are                      
              properly combinable within 35 U.S.C.  103, key features common to the independent                       
              claims grouped by appellant (that is, independent claims 1, 13, 18 and their respective                  
              dependent claims as well as dependent claims 6, 14, 15, and independent claims 16, 17,                   
              30 and 31 and their respective dependent claims) could not be met as well.  In                           
              independent claim 1, the request/response memory stores request storage memory                           
              information in a particular space as requested by a first device and response storage                    
              memory information in a separate space corresponding to a second device, where this                      
              request storage memory space indicates accessibility to both the first and the second                    


Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  Next 

Last modified: November 3, 2007