Ex parte ATSUMI et al. - Page 2




          Appeal No. 1997-4092                                                        
          Application No. 08/181,404                                                  


          array including a plurality of flag cells.  Each of the flag                
          cells corresponds to one of the refresh blocks, and stores                  
          data representing refresh status of the corresponding refresh               
          block.                                                                      
               Claim 1 is illustrative of the claimed invention, and it               
          reads as follows:                                                           
          1.   A nonvolatile semiconductor memory system comprising:                  
               a nonvolatile memory cell array including a plurality of               
          nonvolatile memory cells arranged in matrix, said nonvolatile               
          memory cell array being divided into refresh blocks;                        
               a flag cell array including a plurality of nonvolatile                 
          flag cells each of which corresponds to one of said refresh                 
          blocks and stores data representing refresh status of the                   
          corresponding refresh block.                                                
               The reference relied on by the examiner is:                            
          Hollerbauer              5,283,885                     Feb. 1,              
          1994                                                                        
                                   (effective filing date Apr. 12, 1989)              
               Claims 1 through 26 and 30 through 51 stand rejected                   
          under 35 U.S.C. § 102(e) as being anticipated by Hollerbauer.               
               Reference is made to the final rejection, the briefs and               
          the answer for the respective positions of the appellants and               
          the examiner.                                                               
                                       OPINION                                        

                                          2                                           





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

Last modified: November 3, 2007