Appeal No. 2001-2125
Application No. 08/906,537
unfounded assumptions or rationales to supply deficiencies in the
factual basis of the rejection before us. In re Warner, 379 F.2d
1011, 1017, 154 USPQ 173, 178 (CCPA 1967), cert. denied, 389 U.S.
1057 (1968), rehearing denied, 390 U.S. 1000 (1968).
In view of the above discussion, since the Examiner has not
established a prima facie case of obviousness, the 35 U.S.C.
§ 103(a) rejection of independent claims 1, 12, 17, and 18, as well
as claims 3, and 5-11 dependent thereon, based on the combination
of Taborn and De Angel, is not sustained.
We also do not sustain the Examiner’s obviousness rejection of
claims 2 and 13 in which Ozaki is added to Taborn and De Angel, nor
the obviousness rejection of claims 14-16 in which Essig is added
to Taborn and De Angel. We have reviewed the Ozaki and Essig
references, added by the Examiner as providing a teaching of sign
bit changing and adder stage counting, respectively. We find
nothing, however, in either of these references that would overcome
the innate deficiencies of Taborn and De Angel discussed supra.
8
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007