Appeal No. 1997-4116 Page 6
Application No. 08/589,826
one or more addressable entities within
said first of said two or more
reconfigurable storage entities, and
d. turning on an indicator associated with
said same relative addressable entity if
said same relative addressable entity does
not contain "fixed" data, said indicator
indicating that said same relative
addressable entity should not be used to
contain fixed data.
Besides the appellants’ admitted prior art (AAPA), the
reference relied on in rejecting the claims follows:
Moore et al. (Moore) 4,430,727 Feb. 7,
1984
Claims 1-3 and 5-14 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103
as obvious over AAPA in view of Moore. Rather than repeat the
arguments of the appellants or examiner in toto, we refer the
reader to the brief and answer for the respective details2
thereof.
OPINION
In reaching our decision in this appeal, we considered
the subject matter on appeal and the rejection advanced by
2The reply brief filed on June 10, 1997 was denied entry.
(Paper No. 28 at 2.)
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007