Appeal No. 1997-3241
Application 08/442,726
First, we consider the rejection of claims 15, 16 and 17
under 35 U.S.C. § 102 as being anticipated by Miu.
Anticipation is established only when a single prior art
reference discloses, expressly or under the principles of
inherency, each and every element of a claimed invention as
well as disclosing structure which is capable of performing
the recited functional limitations. RCA Corp. v. Applied
Digital Data Sys. Inc., 730 F.2d 1440, 1444, 221 USPQ 385, 388
(Fed. Cir. 1984), cert. dismissed, 468 U.S. 1228 (1984); W. L.
Gore & Assoc., Inc. v. Garlock Inc., 721 F.2d 1540, 1554, 220
USPQ 303, 313 (Fed. Cir. 1983), cert. denied, 469 U.S. 851
(1984).
The Examiner asserts on page 3 of the answer that “[t]he
claimed ‘ripple counter’ corresponds to the initialize counter
10-50, MUX 10-52, MUX 10-54, replacement level generator 10-6
and cache control circuits 10-4 shown in figures 1-3."
Further, the Examiner asserts that the comparing is performed
by comparators 10-602, 10-622. On page 4 of the answer, the
Examiner contends that Miu teaches in column 4, lines 39-53,
4
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007