Ex Parte LEWIS et al - Page 3



          Appeal No. 2000-2207                                                        
          Application No. 08/968,379                                                  

                         a pull-up resistor coupled to the sensing line,              
               the pull-up resistor driving the sensing line to a high                
               voltage level if the external termination device is                    
               disconnected from the SCSI bus,                                        
                         at least one termination resistor coupled to each            
               of the plurality of bus signal lines of the SCSI bus to                
               provide a terminating impedance at the external connector of           
               the SCSI bus, and                                                      
                         a plurality of switches each including a                     
               transistor having a gate coupled to the sensing line, each             
               of the plurality of switches coupled to one of the plurality           
               of termination resistors and terminating a separate bus                
               signal line of the SCSI bus if the sensing line is pulled to           
               the high voltage level.                                                
               The Examiner relies on the following prior art:                        
          Thrower et al. (Thrower)      5,381,034           Jan. 10, 1995             
          Hiroyuki                 JP 03-023706        Jan. 31, 1991                  
          (published Japanese Kokai Patent Application)                               
               Claims 23-27, 30, 37-40, 42, and 43 stand finally rejected             
          under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as being unpatentable over Thrower in              
          view of Hiroyuki.                                                           
               Rather than reiterate the arguments of Appellants and the              
          Examiner, reference is made to the Brief (Paper No. 33) and                 
          Answer (Paper No. 34) for the respective details.                           
                                      OPINION                                         
               We have carefully considered the subject matter on appeal,             
          the rejection advanced by the Examiner and the evidence of                  
          obviousness relied upon by the Examiner as support for the                  
                                          3                                           




Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  Next 

Last modified: November 3, 2007