Appeal No. 2001-2694
Application No. 09/103,704
this decision. Arguments which appellants could have made but
chose not to make in the brief have not been considered and are
deemed to be waived (see 37 CFR 1.192 (a)).
The examiner applies Popescu for a teaching of transient
noise analysis through simulation in the time domain of a circuit
and the generation of stationary noise. Recognizing that Popescu
does not teach the generation of noise for each circuit element
represented in the simulation, the examiner turns to Bolcato for
a teaching of added current sources as representing physical
noises of devices. The examiner concludes that it would have
been obvious “to incorporate the noise equivalent current sources
of Bolcato . . . into the noise simulation methods disclosed by
Popescu . . ., because such a combination would permit more
accurate noise modelling using a SPICE-type simulator” (answer,
page 5).
For their part, appellants argue that whereas independent
claims 1 and 13 require a noise source for each circuit element
and a summing of the element’s noise current with the element’s
deterministic current, “Popescu simulates with a single noise
source for an entire circuit and, in fact, adds the precomputed
noise after generating the circuit output (page 554, second and
fourth paragraphs of section 2)” (brief, page 3).
-5-
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007