Appeal No. 1997-2474 Page 12
Application No. 08/125,590
of claims 9-12 under 35 U.S.C. § 103. Next, we address claim
13.
Claim 13
Regarding the obviousness of claim 13, the appellants
argue, “the use of a bias value as recited in the claim is not
disclosed, taught or suggested by any reference of record.”
(Appeal Br. at 12.) The examiner offers no reply to the
argument. We agree with the appellants.
Claim 13 specifies in pertinent part the following
limitation: “adding a bias value to the amplitude values when
the input sample is signed ....” The examiner fails to
show a teaching or suggestion of the limitation in the prior
art. He merely notes, “Uramoto et al's Fig. 9 shows separate
tables are used for the least and most significant portions,
and it is inherent that the table corresponding with the most
significant portion is addressing only when the most
Page: Previous 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007