Appeal No. 1999-0261
Application No. 08/703,496
signal over data lines within said data
communication bus from said first electronic device
to a third electronic device, said shutdown signal
instructing said third electronic device to
eliminate power to a device slot; and
releasing the data communication bus from being
paused such that all communication on the data
communication bus by electrical devices is allowed
after a connection transition of a second electrical
device in said device slot.
The examiner relies upon the following references as
evidence of obviousness:
Herrig et al. (Herrig) 4,835,737 May 30,
1989
Parrett 5,586,271 Dec. 17,
1996
(filed Sep. 27, 1994)
Claims 1-20 stand finally rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103.
As evidence of obviousness, the Examiner offers Herrig alone
with respect to claims 1-3, 6-9, 12-14, and 16-20, and adds
Parrett to Herrig with respect to claims 4, 5, 10, 11, and 15.
Rather than reiterate the arguments of Appellants and the
Examiner, reference is made to the Brief (Paper No. 11) and
Answer (Paper No. 12) for the respective details.
OPINION
We have carefully considered the subject matter on
3
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007