Appeal No. 2000-1289 Page 6
Application No. 08/604,829
does not disclose, teach, or render obvious a first group of
memory devices 10 and a second group of memory devices 11. . .
." (Appeal Br. at 5.)
In deciding obviousness, “[a]nalysis begins with a key
legal question -- what is the invention claimed?” Panduit
Corp. v. Dennison Mfg. Co., 810 F.2d 1561, 1567, 1 USPQ2d
1593, 1597 (Fed. Cir. 1987). Here, independent claim 11
specifies in pertinent part the following limitations: "a
first group of memory devices comprising a plurality of memory
devices equivalent in number to said plurality of magnetic
disk communication means; a second group of memory devices
comprising a plurality of memory devices equivalent in number
to said plurality of magnetic disk communication means; a
switch means for enabling connection alternately between (a)
and (b): (a) said second group of memory devices and said
magnetic disk communication means and between said first group
of memory devices and said external communication means; and
(b) said first group of memory devices and said magnetic disk
communication means and between said second group of memory
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007