Ex parte RHODEN et al. - Page 2




          Appeal No. 1999-0466                                                        
          Application 08/530,617                                                      


          the rejection of claims 1 and 2.                                            


          The disclosed invention pertains to a data processing                       
          system in which display memory is reallocated for use as                    
          system memory.                                                              
          Representative claim 1 is reproduced as follows:                            
          1.  Apparatus for processing data comprising:                               
               a system controller;                                                   
               means for controlling a system display operation                       
          independently of the system controller;                                     
          means for storing data, said data storing means having                      
          a display memory portion with a first addressable location;                 
          and                                                                         
          means for reallocating said first addressable location                      
          of the data storing means as system memory which is accessible              
          by the system controller via said display controlling means.                
                                                                                     
          The examiner relies on the following references:                            
          Kelleher et al. (Kelleher)      4,953,101        Aug. 28, 1990              
          “64200 (Wingine ) High Performance ‘Windows  Engine’”, ChipsTM                         TM                               
          and Technologies, Inc., July 1992, pages 4-11, 96 and 97                    
          (hereinafter Wingine).                                                      
          Claims 1 and 2 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103.                        
          As evidence of obviousness the examiner offers Wingine in view              
          of Kelleher.                                                                

                                          2                                           





Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  Next 

Last modified: November 3, 2007