Ex Parte ROBINSON et al - Page 2




               Appeal No. 2004-1402                                                                                                   
               Application No. 09/383,478                                                                                             


                                                         BACKGROUND                                                                   
                       Appellants’ invention relates to improved arithmetic circuits for use with the                                 
               residue number system (RNS).  An understanding of the invention can be derived from                                    
               a reading of exemplary claim 1, which is reproduced below.                                                             
               1.      A modulo mi adder for use with an RNS, said adder comprising:                                                  
                       a modulo mi barrel shifter; and                                                                                
                       a dynamic storage unit coupled to the barrel shifter, the dynamic storage unit                                 
               storing the output of the barrel shifter.                                                                              

                       The prior art references of record relied upon by the examiner in rejecting the                                
               appealed claims are:                                                                                                   
               Ishibashi                                       5,208,480                               May 4, 1993                    
               Chren, W. A., “One-Hot Residue Coding for Low Delay-Power Product CMOS Design,”                                        
               45 IEEE Transactions on Circuits and Systems -Analog and Digital Signal Processing                                     
               no. 1, 303-313 (March 1998)                                                                                            
               Appellants’ Admitted Prior Art - (AAPA) See Figures 2(a) and 2(b) and associated text.                                 
                       Claims 1-9 and 31-36 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as being                                          
               unpatentable over AAPA in view of Ishibashi.  Claims 28-30 and 37-39 stand rejected                                    
               under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as being unpatentable over AAPA and Ishibashi further in                                      
               view of Chren.                                                                                                         
                       Rather than reiterate the conflicting viewpoints advanced by the examiner and                                  
               appellants regarding the above-noted rejections, we make reference to the examiner's                                   

                                                                  2                                                                   





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

Last modified: November 3, 2007