Appeal No. 2003-0351
Application 09/436,421
stand or fall together. Note In re King, 801 F.2d 1324, 1325,
231 USPQ 136, 137 (Fed. Cir. 1986); In re Sernaker, 702 F.2d 989,
991, 217 USPQ 1, 3 (Fed. Cir. 1983). Therefore, we will consider
the rejection against independent claim 1 as representative of
all the claims on appeal.
Anticipation is established only when a single prior art
reference discloses, expressly or under the principles of
inherency, each and every element of a claimed invention as well
as disclosing structure which is capable of performing the
recited functional limitations. RCA Corp. v. Applied Digital
Data Systems, Inc., 730 F.2d 1440, 1444, 221 USPQ 385, 388 (Fed.
Cir.); cert. dismissed, 468 U.S. 1228 (1984); W.L. Gore and
Associates, Inc. v. Garlock, Inc., 721 F.2d 1540, 1554, 220 USPQ
303, 313 (Fed. Cir. 1983), cert. denied, 469 U.S. 851 (1984).
The examiner has indicated how he reads the claimed
invention on the disclosure of Hunt [answer, pages 3-4].
Appellants argue that Hunt does not teach or suggest selecting an
order for data transmission or encoding the order in a selected
order bit set. Appellants argue that Hunt does not provide a
cache line-by-cache line ordering of data retrieval or the
issuing of the selected order bit set ahead of the data [brief,
pages 4-5]. The examiner responds that the data in Hunt is
-4-
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007