Appeal No. 2006-1901
Application No. 10/742,436
Claims 1-3, 5 and 6 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a)
as being unpatentable over Zhang and Jamshidi.
We make reference to the briefs and answer for the
respective positions of Appellants and the Examiner. Only those
arguments actually made by Appellants have been considered in
this decision. Arguments which Appellants could have made but
chose not to make in the briefs have not been considered (37 CFR
§ 41.37(c)(1)(vii)).
OPINION
In rejecting claims 1-3, 7-9 and 11, the Examiner relies on
Calin or Zhang for teaching a latch circuit comprising first and
second latches and the transmission gate in the second latch
(answer, pages 3-5). The Examiner further relies on Jamshidi for
providing a two-transistor transmission gate to be used instead
of the transmission gate with a single transistor as described in
Calin (answer, page 4). Relying on Jamshidi’s disclosure related
to providing a full signal swing by using two transistors, the
Examiner concludes that using two transistors in the transmission
gate of Calin would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in
the art (id.).
3
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007