Ex parte JOLY et al. - Page 5




            Appeal No. 1997-0553                                                                              
            Application No. 08/409,191                                                                        


            ships or concerns which skilled artisans would have encountered being confronted with             
            problems involving the synthesis of gate level circuits from a behavioral description.            
            Specifically, timing and loads are discussed in Dangelo.  (See Dangelo at column 3.)              
                   Appellants argue that Drumm attempts to improve the global optimization process            
            by reducing the gate count that goes into the conventional final optimization.  Appellants        
            contrast the method of the present invention which improves the global optimization               
            process by performing the global optimization on a circuit description in which the gate          
            level description of at least one of the logic blocks is replaced by a synthesis shell that acts  
            as a proxy for the gate level description of the logic block during global optimization.  The     
            shell is generated by reducing the high level description of a functional block to a gate level   
            description and then replacing the gate                                                           

            level description with a shell that preserves the essential timing and load information while     
            eliminating one or more gates.  (See brief at pages 4-5.)  We disagree with appellants.           
            Appellants characterize the disclosed invention rather than the invention as                      
            recited in claim 1.  The language of claim 1 is silent as to the use of a proxy.  Further, we     
            find that the method does not recite limitations that the logical or computational function is    
            not necessarily being retained in the gate reduction.  (See brief at page 5.)                     
                   Appellants argue that the invention can reduce the number of gates much smaller            
            than Drumm can because the logic function does not have to satisfy the same logic                 


                                                      5                                                       





Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  Next 

Last modified: November 3, 2007