Ex Parte Osborn et al - Page 6

                  Appeal 2007-1572                                                                                         
                  Application 09/726,831                                                                                   

                  and additional memory is allocated to satisfy the memory requirements of a                               
                  selected graphics mode (col. 1, ll. 40-49; col. 3, ll. 13-23).                                           
                         11. Nale’s invention enables a system memory to be shared by a                                    
                  graphics controller without requiring a user to reboot the system to                                     
                  accommodate more demanding graphics modes (col. 1, ll. 41-44; col. 3, ll.                                
                  25-29).                                                                                                  
                                                         Reddy                                                             
                         12.  Reddy teaches a shared memory graphics accelerator system                                    
                  that provides graphics display data to a display (Abstract).                                             
                         13. Reddy includes an on-chip frame buffer 112 and an off-chip                                    
                  frame buffer 114 (Fig. 2).                                                                               

                                               PRINCIPLES OF LAW                                                           
                         In rejecting claims under 35 U.S.C. § 103, the Examiner bears the                                 
                  initial burden of establishing a prima facie case of obviousness.  In re                                 
                  Piasecki, 745 F.2d 1468, 1472, 223 USPQ 785, 788 (Fed. Cir. 1984).  The                                  
                  Examiner can satisfy this burden by showing some articulated reasoning                                   
                  with some rational underpinning to support the legal conclusion of                                       
                  obviousness.  KSR Int’l. v. Teleflex Inc., 127 S. Ct. 1727, 1741, 82 USPQ2d                              
                  1385, 1396 (2007) (citing In re Kahn, 441 F.3d 977, 988, 78 USPQ2d 1329,                                 
                  1336 (Fed. Cir. 2006)).  Only if this initial burden is met does the burden of                           
                  coming forward with evidence or argument shift to the Appellant.  Piasecki,                              
                  745 F.2d at 1472, 223 USPQ at 788.  Thus, the Examiner must not only                                     
                  assure that the requisite findings are made, based on evidence of record, but                            
                  must also explain the reasoning by which the findings are deemed to support                              
                  the Examiner’s conclusion.                                                                               

                                                            6                                                              

Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  13  Next

Last modified: September 9, 2013