Appeal No. 2003-0194
Application No. 09/280,112
combine the teachings of Noguchi and Lau because Noguchi “used
orthogonal instruction sets and therefore would have the need to
separate the data in processing one instruction set with another
instruction set. In the partitioning memory space is lost. Lau
provided a method for recovering the lost memory space by
providing virtual memory banks. These virtual memory banks
clearly would have provided increased efficiency to the Noguchi
system...” (answer-page 4).
We find that the examiner has not set forth a prima facie
case of obviousness with regard to the claimed subject matter.
Accordingly, we will not sustain the examiner’s rejection of
claims 1-142 under 35 U.S.C. § 103.
First, even if Noguchi and Lau disclosed everything they are
alleged to disclose, which they do not, there would have been no
reason to combine these references. Noguchi has nothing
whatsoever to do with dividing memory into n banks, with a bank
select unit for accessing one of the banks or a virtual bank.
Therefore, to the extent that Lau might teach a bank select unit,
as claimed, there would have been no reason other than
impermissible hindsight for modifying anything in Noguchi with
Lau’s teachings.
Moreover, we find nothing in either of the applied
-6–
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007