Ex Parte IACOBOVICI et al - Page 2




          Appeal No. 2002-2237                                         Page 2           
          Application No. 09/336,046                                                    


                                      BACKGROUND                                        
               Appellants' invention relates to formed linked lists using               
          content addressable memory (CAM).  An understanding of the                    
          invention can be derived from a reading of exemplary claim 1,                 
          which is reproduced as follows:                                               
               1. In a computing system, a method for traversing a linked               
          list comprising the following steps:                                          
               (a) accessing a first entry in the linked list; and,                     
               (b) accessing a second entry in the linked list, including               
          the following substep;                                                        
                    (b.1) searching a content addressable memory, which                 
          contains at least a portion of the second entry, for a reference              
          to the first entry in the linked list, the reference functioning              
          as a pointer from the second entry to the first entry, wherein                
          existence of the pointer within a valid entry is sufficient                   
          identification of the valid entry as being uniquely the second                
          entry.                                                                        
               The prior art references of record relied upon by the                    
          examiner in rejecting the appealed claims are:                                
          Holtz                    4,366,551                 Dec. 28, 1982              
          Smith et al.            5,283,882                 Feb.  1, 1994               
          (Smith)                                                                       
               Claims 1, 3, 4, and 21 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C.                    
          § 103(a) as being unpatentable over Holtz.                                    
               Claims 2 and 5 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as                
          being unpatentable over Holtz in view of Smith.                               








Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  13  Next 

Last modified: November 3, 2007