Appeal No. 97-2477
Application 08/212,908
sufficiently high level of abstraction for providing a
behavioral description as is required by the appellant’s
claims. We agree with the appellant. At least the icons 66,
68, 82, and 84 are structural circuit elements. Icon 66 is an
AND gate; icon 68 is an OR gate; icons 82 and 84 are other
logical circuits. We disagree with the examiner that these
icons are at the “behavioral” level within the context of the
appellant’s specification. Their presence in the collection
of descriptor icons used to design a digital device negates
and disqualifies the description as a “behavioral
description.”
On pages 7-8 of the examiner’s answer, the examiner cites
to four U.S. Patents which are not any part of the stated
ground of rejection. Supposedly, these patents are believed
by the examiner as supporting his position that the structural
schematic icons in Dunn are properly regarded as behavioral
descriptions. But no meaningful explanation has been provided
and no specific portion of those references have been
identified by the examiner. Just how those references support
the examiner’s position has not been articulated and we
decline to speculate as to what the examiner has in mind.
9
Page: Previous 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007