Ex parte IWASAWA et al. - Page 3

          Appeal No. 1997-1212                                                        
          Application 08/017,839                                                      

               source program into a data processing device, the data                 
               processing device including of [sic] a processor unit                  
               and a data storage;                                                    
                         deciding via the data processing device, based               
               on the predetermined reference condition, whether a                    
               portion of the source program is determinable as                       
                         prompting, in accordance with an output of the               
               data processing device, a user for assist information                  
               upon a determination by the deciding step that said                    
               program portion is presently indeterminable as                         
               parallelizable; and                                                    
                         deciding, via the data processing device,                    
               whether said program portion is parallelizable, based                  
               on assist information supplied from the user.                          

               The Examiner relies on the following prior art:                        
               Iwasawa et al. (Iwasawa)      5,151,991   September                    
          29, 1992                                                                    
          (filed October 18,                                                          
               Padua, et al. (Padua), Advanced Compiler Optimizations                 
               For Supercomputers, Communications of the ACM,                         
               Volume 29, Number 12, December 1986.                                   
               Claims 1-12 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C.  112,                      
          second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to                        
          particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject                     
          matter which applicant regards as his invention.                            
               Claims 1-12 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C.  103 as                    
          being unpatentable over Padua and Iwasawa.                                  
                                        - 3 -                                         

Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  13  14  15  Next 

Last modified: November 3, 2007