Appeal No. 2005-0351
Application 10/186,871
the separate rejection of independent claims 9 and 17 under
35 U.S.C. § 103. Additionally, arguments are presented as to
dependent claim 11 as representative of the group comprising
claims 11, 12 and 13 as noted at pages 3 and 4 of the principal
Brief on appeal. No arguments are presented as to the 35 U.S.C.
§ 103 rejection of claim 18.
Turning first to the rejection of claim 18, we sustain
the rejection of this claim under 35 U.S.C. § 102 as being
anticipated by Jouppi as set forth by the examiner at page 5 of
the Answer in the statement of the rejection, as well as in view
of the responsive arguments set forth in the Answer at pages 26
and 27.
In considering appellant’s arguments as to this
rejection at Brief pages 22 and 23, we are unpersuaded by
appellant’s positions presented here. It appears that appellant
is arguing the fact that because the coverage masks of Jouppi
define linking information, they do not meet the feature of claim
18 on appeal of the broadly recited “coverage information.” We
disagree with this view as the examiner has clarified at pages 26
and 27 of the Answer. Appellant’s additional remarks at page 23
of the principal Brief on appeal also appear to invite us to read
4
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007