Appeal 2007-0399
Application 09/961,024
control the flow of data, Earnest teaches using different flags on
different output channels to indicate start and stop messages.
(Earnest, Col. 11, ll. 35 to 45). We find that Earnest is working
in the same field of endeavor, communication channels for
DMA controllers with data interface controllers, as Baker.
Indeed, they are addressing the same problem, namely
managing communications between the DMA engines and the
interface.
6. We observe in the record of transactions of this prosecution, as
indicated in the PALM records and documents on file, that in
the Final Rejection mailed November 5, 2004, the Examiner
took Official Notice concerning the power savings circuits
being common in the prior art. Appellants did mention the
Official Notice in the Amendment after Final Rejection filed
March 10, 2005, but we find that the Examiner’s use of Official
Notice was not traversed. Appellants instead mentioned that
changes in the independent claim rendered the subject claim
allowable. However, it is noted that the Examiner did
nonetheless support his Official Notice of power circuits and
the round-robin algorithm with the submissions of Fung,
Gulick, Dahlen and Vernon, used solely to bolster his statement
of Official Notice. (Examiner’s Answer 12).
7. Appellants contend that Claims 4 and 5 recite long lists of
different registers, not clearly pointed out by the Examiner to be
in the Baker reference. (Br. 15). We find that the wordings of
7
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Next
Last modified: September 9, 2013