Ex Parte Ansari - Page 5




                 Appeal No. 2005-2273                                                                                  Page 5                     
                 Application No. 10/319,026                                                                                                       



                         will be satisfied much more quickly than a miss in cache, see FOLDOC                                                     
                         definition) results in the issue rate also having temporary rate imbalances.                                             
                 (Id. at  10.)  Based on this assertion, the examiner concludes, "addition of a queue as                                          
                 taught by Popescu to smooth those temporary rate imbalances would have been                                                      
                 obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of invention."  (Id.)  The appellant                                     
                 argues, "An imbalance between the rate instructions are issued and the rate issued                                               
                 instructions are executed depends on the speed at which instructions are executed.                                               
                 If Karp employs a processor that executes instructions faster than instructions are                                              
                 issued, there will be no adverse rate imbalance regardless of whether the instructions                                           
                 issue from a cache memory or from normal memory."  (Reply Br. at 3)                                                              




                         "In addressing the point of contention, the Board conducts a two-step analysis.                                          
                 First, we construe the independent claim at issue to determine its scope.  Second, we                                            
                 determine whether the construed claim would have been obvious."  Ex parte Sehr,                                                  
                 No. 2003-2165, 2005 WL 191041, at *3 (Bd.Pat.App & Int. 2004).                                                                   















Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  13  14  15  Next 

Last modified: November 3, 2007