Appeal No. 2002-1777 Page 10
Application No. 08/953,219
the last word of the token. The next word is then assumed to be the first word of a new
token." Id. at 14-17. The examiner fails to show, however, that the LOW extension bit
is written into the token at a location separate from the first and last words of the token.
To the contrary, the LOW extension bit is part of the last word of the token. The
absence of such a showing negates anticipation. Therefore, we reverse the
anticipation rejection of claim 28.
CONCLUSION
In summary, the rejection of claims 1-4, 6-17, and 21-30 under § 102(e) and the
rejection of claims 5 and 18 -20 under § 103(a) are reversed.
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007