Appeal 2007-1572
Application 09/726,831
of an application running on the computing device according to
changing graphical needs of the application, the display modes
including at least one of resolution modes and color modes.
The prior art relied upon by the Examiner in rejecting the
claims on appeal is:
Reddy US 5,712,664 Jan. 27, 1998
Nale US 5,793,385 Aug. 11, 1998
Crocker US 5,915,265 Jun. 22, 1999
Claims 1-13 and 15-30 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as
being obvious over Crocker in view of Nale and Reddy.
Appellants contend that the Examiner erred because the limitations
asserted to be taught by Reddy are not present in the reference; because the
Examiner failed to articulate proper motivation or suggestion to combine the
teachings of Crocker, Nale, and Reddy; and because Crocker teaches away
from Reddy and from the claimed invention (Br. 8-12). The Examiner
contends that Reddy teaches both internal and external display RAMs, and
that the skilled artisan would have been motivated to make the combination
to increase data retrieval speed and reduce on-chip power dissipation
(Answer 4-5).
Rather than repeat the arguments of Appellants or the Examiner, we
refer to the Briefs and the Answer for their respective details. Only those
arguments actually made by Appellants have been considered in this
decision. Arguments that Appellants could have made but chose not to
3
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 Next
Last modified: September 9, 2013