Appeal 2007-0224
Application 09/754,785
reference is resolved” (Claim 16, emphasis added). Nevertheless, after
closely examining the Levine reference in its entirety, we find Levine
explicitly discloses ‘modern UNIX systems” that execute on a “64-bit
architecture” (Levine, pp. 2 and 4). Thus, we find Levine discloses, in at
least one embodiment, a computer structure having a “64-bit architecture”
that runs a version of the UNIX® operating system (id.). In particular, we
note that our reviewing court has determined that the absence of a disclosure
relating to function does not defeat a finding of anticipation if all the claimed
structural limitations are found in the reference. In re Schreiber, 128 F.3d
1473, 1477, 44 USPQ2d 1429, 1431 (Fed. Cir. 1997).
In Schreiber, the court held that a funnel-shaped oil dispenser spout
anticipated a claimed conical-shaped popcorn dispensing top, even though
the function of popcorn dispensing was not taught by the reference, because
the reference met all the structural limitations of the claim. In re Schreiber,
128 F.3d at 1479, 44 USPQ2d at 1433. Here, we have found supra that
Levine inherently discloses the claimed target memory space. We further
find that Levine inherently discloses the claimed local memory as required
for execution of a UNIX® linker and associated lorder, tsort, and ar
utilities. Thus, we find that a computer having a “64-bit architecture” (i.e., a
structure including a target memory space and local memory) is clearly
capable of performing the recited negative functional limitation of
“resolving the at least one symbol reference without storing the entire
software module in local memory while the symbol reference is resolved”
(Claim 16, emphasis added). Accordingly, we find that Levine anticipates
independent claim 16 because the absence of a disclosure relating to
10
Page: Previous 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 Next
Last modified: September 9, 2013