Appeal No. 1997-0521
Application No. 08/105,839
language. An understanding of the invention can be derived from a reading of exemplary
claim 1, which is reproduced below.
1. A device that converts a computer program written in an original computer
language into a target program written in a target computer language, which is different
from the original computer language, said device comprising:
a conversion rule input means which produces a conversion model created by
inputting statements in said original language, and inputting the functional equivalent of
said original language statements in said target language;
a conversion rule generation means for generating conversion rules from said
conversion model;
an original program input means for inputting statements from said original
program; and
a conversion rule drive means which locates conversion rules corresponding to said
inputted original program statements and converts said original program into said target
program according to the content of located conversion rules.
The prior art references of record relied upon by the examiner in rejecting the
appealed claims are:
Bowles et al. (Bowles) 4,374,408 Feb. 15, 1983
Mohri 4,712,189 Dec. 08, 1987
Tolin 4,864,503 Sep. 05, 1989
Claims 1 and 7 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable over
Tolin. Claims 2-6, 9 and 10 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable
over Tolin in view of Mohri. Claim 8 stands rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being
2
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007