Appeal No. 2006-1604 Page 8
Application No. 09/903,201
relies upon Farago for its teaching of a memory containing demonstration
data, as claimed [answer, page 4]. The examiner further relies upon Wett
for teaching a second mode of operation wherein the controller boots from
an external memory, as claimed (claim 7) [answer, page 8].
Appellants argue that independent claims 1 and 11 distinguish over
the combination of Lin and Farago because Lin and Farago do not teach nor
suggest using a controller in a cable that connects a host computer to a
peripheral [reply brief, page 5, brief, page 3].
In response, the examiner asserts that: “Lin teaches cables 4 & 5
containing adaptive circuitry 1. Therefore, the cable + functional circuitry of
Lin as well as other cables + functional circuitry read on applicant’s
described definition of a ‘cable’ ” [answer, page 4].
We note that the examiner relies solely upon Lin for allegedly teaching
the claimed “controller of a type employed in the cable” (independent claim
1) and the “cable containing a controller” (independent claim 11).
“During patent examination, the pending claims must be given their
broadest reasonable interpretation consistent with the specification." In re
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007