Appeal 2007-2218
Application 10/035,595
Has Appellant shown that the Examiner has failed to establish Huang
describes the specific features required by claims 2-5?
Has Appellant shown that the Examiner has failed to establish Huang
describes the limitations required by claims 9-14?
Has Appellant shown that the Examiner has failed to establish Lynch
suggests “an analyzer circuit” and “a results circuit” as required by claim 1?
FINDINGS OF FACT
The following Findings of Fact (FF) are shown by a preponderance of
the evidence.
Huang
1. The prior art Huang patent describes that “If the generation of
the result produces one of a predetermined set of special operands, a tag
generator also generates a tag having a predetermined tag value
corresponding to the produced special operand.” (Col. 5, ll. 43-46).
2. The prior art Huang patent describes that “each of the registers
116 and 118 has an operand value storage portion 116-1 and 118-1 and a tag
value storage portion 116-2 and 118-2.” (Col. 6, l. 66 through col. 7, l. 2).
3. Figures 1-3 of Huang show a conventional arithmetic
calculation circuit where one or more operands x and y are supplied from a
memory device, such as a register file 12 and the operands x and y are
inputted to an arithmetic section 14. (Col. 1, ll. 40-42).
4. In the conventional circuit, a zero value result (+ or -) is
represented by an operand where (Col. 1, ll. 56-64):
sign= ‘0’ or ‘1’ bit,
4
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Next
Last modified: September 9, 2013