Appeal No. 1998-0710
Application 08/625,379
388 (Fed. Cir.); cert. dismissed, 468 U.S. 1228 (1984); W.L.
Gore and Associates, Inc. v. Garlock, Inc., 721 F.2d 1540,
1554, 220 USPQ 303, 313 (Fed. Cir. 1983), cert. denied, 469
U.S. 851 (1984).
With respect to independent claim 21, the examiner has
indicated how he reads this claim on the disclosure of Newman
[answer, pages 3-4]. Appellants argue that the last two
paragraphs of claim 21 are not fully met by the disclosure of
Newman. Specifically, appellants argue that the searching
technique of Newman sequentially tests paths rather than
simultaneously as claimed, and the flooding technique of
Newman does not target an output multiplexer as claimed
because it is undirected simultaneous communication [brief,
pages 4-5]. Appellants also argue that Newman does not teach
the simultaneous communication paths as claimed [id., page 5].
The examiner essentially responds that the language of
claim 21 is broad enough to read on either the searching
technique or the flooding technique of Newman [answer, pages
4-6].
After a careful review of the record in this case, we
5
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007