Appeal No. 2001-1911
Application No. 08/825,492
page 2 of the reply brief that the language of representative
independent claim 1 on appeal of “a merging method” found in the
header of the merged ATM cell is more than just information
including the number of cells in the merged cells. Again, there
is no recitation of any additional information in representative
independent claim 1 on appeal according to any methodology.
The discussion of the second embodiment beginning at column
9 and the discussion thereof relative to Fig. 13 of Takashima
indicates that a plurality of known ATM cells such
as “cells 1, 2, etc.” are specifically taught to be merged into a
new cell labeled as cell #A. The discussion at column
10 indicates that the header information indicates the number of
cells in the combined cell as well as data length information
therein which permits determination of the allocation of
positional information with respect to each of the old cells that
have been merged. Similar teachings associated with the fourth
embodiment of column 12 indicate that the VCI information of the
header of that embodiment indicates prefixing information
associated with respect to the methodology as recited in
representative independent claim 1 on appeal. Figs. 28 through
31 and their corresponding discussion beginning at column 14 of
Takashima indicates the use of a plurality of different types of
10
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007