Ex Parte RAZDAN et al - Page 1




          The opinion in support of the decision being entered today                  
          was not written for publication and is not binding precedent                
          of the Board.                                                               
                                                            Paper No. 31              

                      UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE                       
                                     __________                                       
                         BEFORE THE BOARD OF PATENT APPEALS                           
                                  AND INTERFERENCES                                   
                                     __________                                       
                               Ex parte RAHUL RAZDAN,                                 
                                   JAMES B. KELLER                                    
                                         AND                                          
                                 RICHARD E. KESSLER                                   
                                     __________                                       
                                Appeal No. 2002-2309                                  
                               Application 09/099,386                                 
                                     __________                                       
                                      ON BRIEF                                        
                                     __________                                       

          Before HAIRSTON, BARRETT, and GROSS, Administrative Patent                  
          Judges.                                                                     
          HAIRSTON, Administrative Patent Judge.                                      

                                 DECISION ON APPEAL                                   
               This is an appeal from the final rejection of claims 1                 
          through 24.                                                                 
               The disclosed invention relates to a method and system for             
          maintaining cache coherence in a multiprocessor system that has a           
          plurality of caches and a main memory.                                      

                                          1                                           





Page:  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  Next 

Last modified: November 3, 2007