Appeal 2007-1572
Application 09/726,831
away from Reddy, and further find that the references are not properly
combinable to arrive at the claimed invention.
Because Appellants have shown that the Examiner’s proposed
combination of references is impermissible, we will not sustain the
Examiner’s rejection of claims 1-13 and 15-30 under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a).
NEW GROUNDS OF REJECTION
We make the following new grounds of rejection using our authority
under 37 C.F.R. § 41.50(b).
Claim 1 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as being obvious over
Crocker in view of Nale.
Crocker teaches a computing device (Fig. 1) comprising a
communications bus (CPU bus 2 and/or I/O bus 8); a display (7) configured
to display in more than one display mode and coupled to the
communications bus (FF 6); a processor (1) coupled to the display and to the
communications bus; a display controller (5) coupled to the communications
bus and having dedicated internal display RAM (4), which is used for
storing display information, and is controlled by display logic (controller 5);
and a dedicated external display RAM (6) coupled to the display controller
(FF 5), the display logic configured to manage the internal and external
display RAM and allocate the internal and external display RAM. Crocker’s
Fig. 1 embodiment does not teach that the display logic is configured to
change the display mode during operation of an application running on the
computing device according to the changing graphical needs of the
10
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 Next
Last modified: September 9, 2013