The opinion in support of the decision being entered today was not written for publication and is not binding precedent of the Board.
Paper No. 28
UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
____________
BEFORE THE BOARD OF PATENT APPEALS
AND INTERFERENCES
____________
Ex parte WILLIAM C. ALEXANDER III, SHREEKANT S. THAKKAR,
PATRICE L. ROUSSEL, THOMAS HUFF,
BRYANT E. BIGBEE, and STEPHEN A. FISCHER
____________
Appeal No. 2004-0909
Application No. 09/053,398
____________
ON BRIEF
____________
Before HAIRSTON, BARRY, and LEVY, and, Administrative Patent Judges.
BARRY, Administrative Patent Judge.
DECISION ON APPEAL
A patent examiner rejected claims 1-26. The appellants appeal therefrom under
35 U.S.C. § 134(a). We reverse.
BACKGROUND
The invention at issue on appeal saves and restores a processor's state during a
context switch. In multitasking operating systems, the use of a processor is commonly
transferred from one task to the next. A task may be postponed, deferred, or canceled.
Page: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007