Appeal No. 2002-0490 Page 6
Application No. 09/152,751
expressly or inherently described, in a single prior art reference." Verdegaal Bros., Inc.
v. Union Oil Co., 814 F.2d 628, 631, 2 USPQ2d 1051, 1053 (Fed. Cir. 1987) (citing
Structural Rubber Prods. Co. v. Park Rubber Co., 749 F.2d 707, 715, 223 USPQ 1264,
1270 (Fed. Cir. 1984); Connell v. Sears, Roebuck & Co., 722 F.2d 1542, 1548, 220
USPQ 193, 198 (Fed. Cir. 1983); Kalman v. Kimberly-Clark Corp., 713 F.2d760, 771,
218 USPQ 781, 789 (Fed. Cir. 1983)). "[A]bsence from the reference of any claimed
element negates anticipation." Kloster Speedsteel AB v. Crucible, Inc., 793 F.2d 1565,
1571, 230 USPQ 81, 84 (Fed. Cir. 1986).
Here, we find no teaching of positioning a check instruction after a dismissible
load instruction in a stream of executable instructions let alone using the check
instruction to determine if an exception should have occurred on an associated load in
the three sections of Mowry cited by the examiner. Figure 1.4 of the reference merely
shows "how prefetching improves performance." P. 7. Its third full paragraph
discusses "how far loads can be moved ahead of their uses." P. 8. For its part, the
Summary section of Mowry recapitulates that "deciding when to drop prefetches is a
complex issue." P. 129.
The absence of positioning a check instruction after a dismissible load instruction
in a stream of executable instructions and using the check instruction to determine if an
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007