Appeal No. 2003-1430
Application No. 09/414,458
The Examiner relies on the following reference in rejecting
the claims:
Glass et al. (Glass) 5,881,257 March 9, 1999
(filed Oct. 8, 1996)
Claims 1-9 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 102(e) as being
anticipated by Glass.
We make reference to the answer (Paper No. 15, mailed
February 11, 2003) for the Examiner’s reasoning in support of the
rejection, and to the appeal brief (Paper No. 14, filed January
6, 2003) for Appellant’s arguments thereagainst.
OPINION
Appellant argues that the multiplexer arrangement of Glass
is responsive to the Hi/Lo bit and size bit to switch appropriate
halves of a selected register (brief, page 5). Appellant further
points out that Glass fails to teach or suggest a multiplexer for
each particular field for receiving a content of that particular
field in a first and second storage location (id.). Appellant
also contrasts the connection of each multiplexer to particular
fields for receiving the contents of the source register and for
supplying the multiplexed output of the claimed invention, as
depicted in Figure 4 of the application, with Figure 4 of Glass
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007