Appeal No. 96-3949
Application No. 08/230,383
all of the independent claims in the application require the
representation of a particular cell placement as a combination
of initial cell placement and a list of cell transpositions.
With respect to the rejection of claims 3-6, 10-14, and
16-24 under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable over Okude
in view of Shahookar, we note that Shahookar was cited to meet
the particular recited cell placement improvement techniques.
Appellants, at page 11 of the Brief, agree that Shahookar
disclose conventional placement improvement methodologies, but
contend that there is no teaching of the storing of cell
placement representation as a combination of initial cell
placement and a set of cell transpositions. On careful review
of Shahookar, we agree with Appellants and conclude that,
therefore, Shahookar does not cure the innate deficiencies of
Okude. Accordingly, we do not sustain the rejection of claims
3-6,
10-14, and 16-24 for the reasons discussed above.
8
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007