Appeal No. 2006-2765
Application No. 10/372,160
be through a printer, a visual display, or other
means - the invention as a whole lacks a practical
application. In contrast to Alappat, the present
claims are not directed towards an improved
computer system itself, but merely towards a use
for a computer system, where said use has no
practical application.
We agree with the examiner’s position that the claims on appeal are directed
to a mathematical abstraction that does not lead to a practical application.
Accordingly, the nonstatutory subject matter rejection of claims 1 through
30 is sustained.
Turning to the anticipation rejection of claims 12 through 15, 17, 18
and 20 through 27, we agree with the examiner’s findings (answer, page 10)
concerning the teachings of Atkins. We additionally agree with the
examiner (answer, page 10) that:
The numerical techniques of Atkins’
chapters 6 and 9 inherently require the use of a
global optimization system, such as a computer
system, in order for them to be applied. Atkins
specifically discloses the use of a computer system
(pg. 307, “Even with increases in computer
speed…dozen atoms.”) and software packages
requiring a computer system (pg. 314,
“Sophisticated software…range of scientists.”) A
computer system capable of performing the
methods recited by Atkins would inherently
7
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Next
Last modified: September 9, 2013