Appeal No. 1999-1608
Application No. 08/506,943
including the generation of logic and timing models comprising the step of a non-pictorial
description and listing of electronic circuits” even though they object to the citing of
1
Rostoker for the first time in the final rejection [brief-page 6]. However, appellants contend
that Rostoker is not properly combinable with Bhaskaran and we agree.
If Rostoker begins with a behavioral description of the circuit to be designed and
then generates an appropriate circuit meeting that behavioral description, it is difficult to
see why, or in what manner, the skilled artisan would have looked to this reference in order
to modify Bhaskaran which is directed to improving pictorial representations. As far as the
instant claimed invention is concerned, it starts with an electric circuit schematic and scans
that pictorial schematic image to convert it into a non-pictorial functional listing of the
circuit’s components. Thus, the relevancy of Rostoker’s generation of an appropriate
circuit from a behavioral description is elusive.
Further, with regard to Rutenbar, it is not clear to us how or why the artisan would
have been led to take the teaching of laying out conductor runs in a two dimensional space
and apply that teaching to a combination of Bhaskaran and
Rostoker to somehow provide for the claimed non-pictorial description of a circuit
wherein that description comprises “an identification and listing of the circuit’s
1This objection is not an appealable matter and is therefore not before us.
6
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007