Appeal No. 1998-2699
Application 08/387,504
In meeting the claim limitations, the Examiner asserts,
final rejection at pages 2 and 3 that "[s]ending a NO-OP
avoids witting [sic, writing] the code to make an exception
not to send anything to the participant, and avoids having to
process the resulting error caused by sending a non-sharable
request. This is a well known programming technique."
Appellants argue, brief at page 6, that "the Examiner has
engaged in an impermissible exercise of hindsight in choosing
to characterize as 'well-known' Applicant's [sic, Applicants']
claimed technique of sending a 'No Operations' request in
place of an allocation request for a non-shareable color cell
to participants which do not support such requests."
In meeting a further claim limitation the Examiner
asserts, final rejection at page 3, that "Ne [sic, Nye] also
teaches the use of the XAllocColor() function that allows
access to closest sharable color ... It is just common sense
to first attempt to allocate a non-sharable color cell, and if
upon failure [sic] then to attempt to access a shared color
cell of the closest color to that requested." Appellants
argue, brief at page 6, that "Nye, at page 200, describes the
failure of requests for allocation of color and notes
-6-
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007