Appeal No. 1999-0485
Application 08/526,781
that Toriumi does not teach a rounding processing means that
rounds the output of the shifting operation means when the
instruction is indicative of an arithmetic operation and does
not round the output of the shifting operation means when the
instruction is indicative of a logical operation. In response
to the Appellant’s argument, the Examiner on page 7 of the
answer agrees that Toriumi fails to disclose a rounding
processing means as claimed but argues that one of ordinary
skill in the art would be motivated to provide such a rounding
means as claimed. The Examiner cannot provide or point to any
indication in Toriumi that provides support for this
assertion.
Upon our review of Toriumi, we fail to find that Toriumi
teaches or suggests a rounding processing means or a rounding
step as recited in Appellant’s claims. We note that it is the
burden of the Examiner to provide such evidence.
We are not inclined to dispense with proof by evidence
when the proposition at issue is not supported by a teaching
in a prior art reference or shown to be common knowledge of
unquestionable demonstration. Our reviewing court requires
9
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007