Appeal No. 1998-1510
Application No. 08/205,737
a cache MISS. However, Chang forms no part of the instant
statement of rejection and we will not consider this reference
in our decision. Where a reference is relied on to support a
rejection, whether or not in a minor capacity, there would
appear to be no excuse for not positively including the
reference in the statement of rejection. In re Hoch, 428 F.2d
1341, 1342 n.3, 166 USPQ 406, 407 n.3 (CCPA 1970).
If the examiner wishes to re-open prosecution, applying
Chang against the instant claims, the examiner should bear in
mind appellants’ arguments in the reply brief and be prepared
to answer the argument that Chang invalidates single words in
a cache memory rather than invalidating data based on read
data corresponding to the highest address word in a multi-word
cache line and a cache MISS.
The examiner’s decision rejecting claims 1 through 5
under 35 U.S.C. § 103 is reversed.
REVERSED
Errol A. Krass )
Administrative Patent Judge )
)
)
)
7
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007