Appeal No. 1999-2412
Application No. 08/553,024
parameters associated with the peripheral computer device into the system RAM.
However, it is the examiner’s view that the claim language is of such breadth as to read on
APA. In particular, it is the examiner’s contention that this distinction is not brought out in
the instant claim language. The examiner contends [answer-page 12, lines 8-10] that there
is “no mention in the claim language that the system RAM or any RAM device is confined
to the host computer.” We disagree.
Each of independent claims 40, 47 and 54 recites “a host computer having a
system RAM” and “loading operating parameters...into the system RAM.” Thus, it is very
clear in the instant claim language that the RAM into which the operating parameters of the
peripheral computer device are loaded is located in the host computer. Since this is
clearly not the case in APA which is directed to loading and storing the operating
parameters in memory at the peripheral device, we will not sustain the rejection of claims
40-57 under 35 U.S.C. § 102(b) as anticipated by APA.
We turn now to the rejection of claims 1-39 under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as unpatentable
over APA in view of Willman.
It is the examiner’s position that APA discloses the claimed subject matter but for
the claimed loadable driver, translating means between the operating system and mass
memory and not requiring any BIOS or any other type of translation mechanism
4
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007