Appeal No. 1998-0711
Application 07/989,027
specific recitations of the claims on appeal.
Appellants’ arguments with respect to the dual
processor requirements of claim 15 are also correct. The two
processors of Majeed perform entirely different calculations
on the data. Thus, the two processors of Majeed cannot
develop identical control signals, and Majeed clearly does not
check for the consistency of data exchanged between the two
processors.
In summary, the examiner’s rejection does not properly
address the specific limitations of the appealed claims.
Thus, the examiner has failed to establish a prima facie case
of obviousness. Accordingly, we do not sustain the examiner’s
9
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007