Appeal No. 1999-2295
Application No. 08/418,797
the art. Uniroyal Inc. v. Rudkin-Wiley Corp., 837 F.2d 1044,
1051, 5 USPQ2d 1434, 1438 (Fed. Cir.), cert. denied, 488 U.S. 825
(1988); Ashland Oil, Inc. v. Delta Resins & Refractories, Inc.,
776 F.2d 281, 293, 227 USPQ 657, 664 (Fed. Cir. 1985), cert.
denied, 475 U.S. 1017 (1986); ACS Hospital Systems, Inc. v.
Montefiore Hospital, 732 F.2d 1572, 1577, 221 USPQ 929, 933 (Fed.
Cir. 1984). These showings by the Examiner are an essential part
of complying with the burden of presenting a prima facie case of
obviousness. Note In re Oetiker, 977 F.2d 1443, 1445, 24 USPQ2d
1443, 1444 (Fed. Cir. 1992).
With respect to independent claims 1, 3, 6, 14, and 19, the
Examiner, as the basis for the obviousness rejection, proposes to
modify the memory management system disclosure of Koufopavlou.
As recognized by the Examiner, Koufopavlou, while providing a
linked list buffer queue and a pointer memory which stores head
and tail pointers, lacks a disclosure of first and second
independent head and tail pointer memories which are accessed by
first and second independent processors as in the appealed
claims. To address this deficiency, the Examiner turns to Chao
and Walp for the teachings of independent head and tail pointer
5
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007