Appeal No. 1998-3331 Page 4
Application No. 08/852,842
a separate auxiliary DSP program memory mapped into
the memory space of said main DSP for storing said
processing instructions.
The prior art applied in rejecting the claims follows:
Intrater et al. (Intrater) 5,491,828 Feb. 13,
1996
Diamondstein et al. (Diamondstein) 5,432,804 July
11, 1995.
Claims 1, 2, 4-17, and 19-20 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C.
§ 103 as being obvious over Intrater in view of Diamondstein.
Rather than reiterate the arguments of the appellants or
examiner in toto, we refer the reader to the brief and answer
for the respective details thereof.
OPINION
In deciding this appeal, we considered the subject matter
on appeal and the rejection of the examiner. Furthermore, we
duly considered the arguments and evidence of the appellants
and examiner. After considering the record, we are persuaded
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007