Appeal No. 2000-1289 Page 5
Application No. 08/604,829
After considering the record, we are persuaded that the
examiner erred in rejecting claims 6, 7, and 9-11.
Accordingly, we reverse.
Rather than reiterate the positions of the examiner or
appellant in toto, we address the main point of contention
there between. The examiner asserts, "Asfour clearly teaches
two distinct groups, although the Asfour device has
significantly more flexibility.” (Examiner's Answer at 8.)
He explains, “Asfour teaches one group of memory connected to
the devices 10 and 11 and another distinct group
simultaneously connected to the external device 90 (see
Asfour, column 8, line 53-column 9, line l2). Asfour's groups
are ‘virtual’ groups in that any of the individual memories
70-73 may be connected to any of the devices 10, 11 or 90. . .
.” (Id.) The appellant argues, "while the Asfour reference
does in fact teach a single memory pool 55 comprising a
plurality of memory banks each of which may be accessed by
either of device 10 or device 11 shown in Figure 1 of the
Asfour reference, it is quite clear that the Asfour reference
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007