Appeal No. 2004-2199
Application No. 09/896,043
the piece of data to convert to a location address
corresponding to an entry pointing to the location
of the piece of data; and
a memory manager manages the data blocks independent of
an operating system and a processor unit executing
the program accessing memory, including managing
locations and movements of the data blocks.
The following reference is relied on by the examiner:
Gulick et al. (Gulick) 6,314,501 Nov. 6, 2001
(filing date: Dec. 18, 1998)
Claims 1 through 20 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 102(e)
as being anticipated by Gulick.
Rather than repeat the positions of the appellants and the
examiner, reference is made to the brief and reply brief for
appellants’ positions, and to the answer for the examiner’s
positions.
OPINION
We reverse.
Generally for the reasons set forth by appellants in the
principal brief, we reverse the rejection of claims 1 through 20
under 35 U.S.C. § 102. Essentially, we have concluded that the
examiner has failed to establish a prima facie case of
anticipation within 35 U.S.C. § 102.
Initially, we note that the examiner takes the position that
certain features are “known in the art” as set forth at the
2
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007