Appeal No. 1999-0011
Application No. 08/428,812
suggest dividing a bit word into modules and using the ith bit
from each module to form a set of parity bits. Consequently,
Bossen in combination with Price neither teaches nor suggests
the invention as recited in independent claim 11." We agree
with Appellants. We are of the view that the Examiner has not
established a prima facie case in rejecting claim 11 as the
Examiner's suggested combination does not meet the claimed
limitation of "using said syndrome bits to locate multiple
errors in said bits in said data word in accordance with a
Hamming error detecting and correcting code and provide an
indication of said located errors; and correcting said
multiple errors in said bits in accordance with said Hamming
error detecting and correcting code to provide corrected data
bits." Therefore, we do not sustain the rejection of claim 11
over Bossen and Price.
Claims 12 to 14
The examiner has rejected claim 12 over Bossen and Price
at page 7 of the Examiners' Answer. First we note that, the
Examiner discusses a syndrome generator, however, we find that
the syndrome generator is not recited in claim 12. However,
we consider the rejection of claim 12 as it pertains to the
12
Page: Previous 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007