Appeal No. 1999-2052
Application No. 08/572,202
decision in that we reverse the rejection of claims 59, 60 and 62
over Smith, Kikinis and Kenny.
Regarding item 18 (claim 67, rehearing request at page 38-40),
we clarify the paragraph from page 16 of our decision which
Appellant has quoted at page 39 of the request for rehearing,
in that the quoted disclosure of Kenny at column 2 lines 37-47
states that the sampling indicates that the integrated circuits
temperature is either cool or cooling, such that temperature count
is thereby decreased, or the sampling indicates the integrated
circuit is generating too much heat and its temperature is
increasing. This process of cooling and heating (temperature
increasing) indicates that the temperature measurement is of
predictive type, which is not static but dynamic and contemplates
the future happenings to the heating and cooling state of the
circuit. Therefore, we find that Kenny discloses the teaching of
predicting future temperature levels as recited in these claims.
Regarding item 19 (claims 28 and 29, rehearing request at
pages 40-43), we have already discussed the propriety of the
combination of Smith, Kikinis and Gephardt at pages 16 and 17 of
our decision. The arguments regarding the lack of a prima facie
case in this combination and that Smith only shows that the
9
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007