Appeal No. 08/911,596
Application No. 2001-2049
input, and on Greiner for the teaching of a change of state based
on threshold and the indication of available memory. However, it
is not clear to us, nor has the examiner provided a cogent
rationale, as to how the references are to be combined, or why
the references would be combined, to arrive at the instant
claimed subject matter.
Similarly, claims 25 and 29 recite a central processing unit
for “selectively enabling the memory to make the first portion of
the memory available for storing a second plurality of translated
data values in response to a first logic state of the commit
input control signal.” The examiner has not convinced us of any
suggestion in the applied references of such selective enablement
of a memory.
We have not sustained the rejection of claims 34-37, 39 and
43 under 35 U.S.C. 102(a) nor have we sustained the rejections of
claims 1-33, 38 and 40-42 under 35 U.S.C. 103.
-9–
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007