Appeal No. 1997-2474 Page 11
Application No. 08/125,590
Each of claims 9-12 specifies in pertinent part the
following limitations:
loading a first plurality of values
corresponding to a plurality of output coefficients
into distinct locations within a single register
...; and
performing in a single operation an accumulation
of a second plurality of values with the first
plurality of values within the single register;
whereby
a plurality of output values are accumulated in
the single register, simultaneously.
Giving claims 9-12 their broadest reasonable interpretation,
we agree with the appellants that each of the claims recites
performing combined operations within a single register.
The examiner fails to show a teaching or suggestion of
the limitations in the prior art. He merely alleges,
“adjusting values in each table and using a [sic] accumulator
with greater length would have been obvious to a person of
ordinary skill in the art.” (Examiner’s Answer at 6.) The
allegation does not establish a prima facie case of
obviousness. Therefore, we reverse the examiner’s rejection
Page: Previous 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007