Appeal No. 1998-2749
Application 08/637,062
decision logic responsive to said held frame monitor for
automatically engaging said DMA circuit to unload the data
frames from said memory buffer when overflow of said memory
buffer is anticipated.
The Examiner relies on the following prior art:
Petersen et al. (Petersen) 5,307,459 April 26, 1994
Hausman et al. (Hausman) 5,412,782 May 2, 1995
(filed July 2, 1992)
Gunji 5,487,154 January 23, 1996
(filed July 14, 1992)
Claims 12-14, 19, 20, and 26-31 stand rejected under
35 U.S.C. § 102(e) as being anticipated by Hausman.
Claims 15-18 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as being
unpatentable over Hausman and Petersen.
Claim 21 stands rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as being
unpatentable over Hausman.
Claims 22-24 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as being
unpatentable over Hausman and Gunji.
We refer to the first Office action (Paper No. 2), the final
rejection (Paper No. 4), and the examiner's answer (Paper No. 9)
(pages referred to as "EA__") for a statement of the Examiner's
position, and to the appeal brief (Paper No. 8) (pages referred to
as "Br__") for a statement of Appellant's arguments thereagainst.
OPINION
- 3 -
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007