Appeal No. 2003-0450
Application 09/394,039
delay of a write address with respect to a read address as
claimed, and do not cure the deficiencies of Kaneko. We conclude
that the examiner has failed to establish a prima facie case of
obviousness with respect to independent claim 2. The rejection
of claim 2 and its dependent claims 3, 4, and 6, is reversed.
Independent claims 7, 13, 19, and 24 recite address delay
limitations similar to those in claim 2 and, for the reasons
already stated with respect to claim 2, the rejection of
claims 7, 13, 19, and 24 and their dependent claims 8, 9, 11,
20-23, and 25-30, is reversed.
CONCLUSION
The rejection of claims 2-4, 6-9, 11, 13, and 19-30 is
reversed.
REVERSED
KENNETH W. HAIRSTON )
Administrative Patent Judge )
)
)) BOARD OF PATENT
LEE E. BARRETT ) APPEALS
Administrative Patent Judge ) AND
) INTERFERENCES
)
)
LANCE LEONARD BARRY )
Administrative Patent Judge )
- 8 -
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007