Ex Parte WARD et al - Page 4




                 Appeal No. 2003-1482                                                                                   
                 Application No.  09/156,816                                                                            

                 appellants argue, on pages 4 through 7 of the reply brief, that even if Kesatoshi                      
                 and Reddy are combined they do not teach the claimed invention.  Appellants                            
                 argue on page 5 of the reply brief:                                                                    
                               As set forth above with respect to claim 1, the Appellant’s [sic]                        
                        invention requires determining the active horizontal resolution and the                         
                        active vertical resolution of a display adapter in two different ways.                          
                        Specifically, claim 1 requires that the variable active horizontal resolution                   
                        is determined by counting a pixel clock.                                                        
                        Further, on page 6 of the reply brief, appellants state:                                        
                               Reddy goes on to explain how standard video formats may be                               
                        inferred from the relative polarity of the HSYNC and VSYNC signals and                          
                        how resort must be made to determining the number of horizontal lines                           
                        per vertical frame or, alternatively, the number of pixels in a horizontal line                 
                        to further characterize which standard video format may be inferred from                        
                        the polarities of the HSYNC and VSYNC signals.  Reddy, col. 8, lines 22-                        
                        67.  Thus Reddy only counts pixels to narrow down and identify the range                        
                        of standard video formats indicated by the polarity of the HSYNC Signals.                       
                               The device disclosed in the Reddy reference does not                                     
                        “determine[e] the variable active horizontal resolution of the display                          
                        controller by counting a pixel clock” as required by Appellant’s [sic] claim                    
                        1.  Nor does Reddy disclose a device that “determine[es] the variable                           
                        active vertical resolution of the display controller by counting active                         
                        horizontal lines between vertical sync pulses,” which is also required by                       
                        claim 1.  Certainly, the Reddy reference utterly fails to disclose a device                     
                        that does both of these things.                                                                 
                        The examiner states, on page 7 of the answer, that Kesatoshi determines                         
                 the resolution by counting to determine the frequency and then uses a look up                          
                 table.  The examiner argues, on page 7 of the answer, “ even though Kesatoshi                          
                 also determines frequency, claims 1 and 31 do not limit other steps used by                            





                                                           4                                                            



Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  Next 

Last modified: November 3, 2007