Appeal No. 2004-0636
Application No. 09/045,041
However, appellant's claims actually recite compressing by
integrating. We find the use of the word "integrating" to be
inconsistent with the idea of compression. Appellant
(Specification, page 4) defines "circuit compression" as
"[c]onverting a circuit composed of a plurality of circuit
elements and a plurality of terminals into a circuit having one
simple circuit element and terminals." Appellant (Specification,
page 4) explains that Figure 2(B) shows the compressed version of
Figure 2(A), as the two identical partial circuits Q1 and Q2 of
Figure 2(A) have been reduced to a single partial circuit in
Figure 2(B). Similarly, appellant (Specification, page 26)
explains that Figure 13 is a compressed form of Figure 11 in that
"the numbers of circuit elements of the first partial circuit 31
and first partial circuit 32 shown in Figure 11 are compressed to
half." Thus, "compressing the circuit," as recited in claim 9,
for example, refers to reducing the number of partial circuits.
However, appellant recites in claim 9, for example, that the
circuit is compressed by "integrating the partial circuits." As
explained supra, integrating suggests making a bigger unit by
bringing together multiple small units. Since compressing, as
defined by appellant, means reducing the number of small units by
eliminating the redundancies, thereby making a smaller unit, it
6
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007