Appeal No. 1998-0368
Application No. 08/632,183
We note that the Examiner is correct in that Mizukami
provides a means for direct data transfer between the two
processors, see figs. 1 and 2. However, the data controlling
function in Mizukami is performed by the processors
themselves,
and not by the interface circuit (as claimed), see col. 2,
lines 3 to 12.
Therefore, we do not sustain the obviousness rejection of
claim 1 over Foster ‘570, Foster ‘654 and Mizukami.
With respect to claims 2 and 3, the Examiner adds Mercer
to the combination of Foster ‘570, Foster ‘654 and Mizukami.
We note that claims 2 and 3 each has a limitation similar to
that discussed above, see “setting an access address in the
responding processor” (claim 2) and “setting an access address
to a first location on the responding processor (claim 3).”
We find that the additional reference to Mercer does not cure
the deficiency noted above. Therefore, we also do not sustain
the obviousness rejection of claims 2 and 3 over Foster ‘570,
Foster ‘654, Mizukami and Mercer.
8
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007