Appeal No. 2005-2512
Reexamination Control No. 90/006,431
Taking claim 17 as representative,27 appellant does not deny that Stark discloses
the claimed power net extractor “for extracting a power net netlist for a power net from
an integrated circuit layout,” a circuit simulator coupled to said power net extractor for
“determining current at selected integrated circuit devices of said integrated circuit
electrically connected to said power net,” and a power net simulator for “determining a
characteristic of portions of said power net according to current at said selected
integrated circuit devices.28 Nor does appellant deny that Stark’s Figures 80-85 are
generated by a display which is “coupled to the power net simulator” and “display[s] a
layout representation of said power net including said characteristic of portions of said
power net,” as required by claim 17 before amendment. Instead, appellant denies that
Stark satisfies the “graphical user interface” limitations added by that amendment, which
in claim 17 call for the recited display to “display[] a graphical user interface including a
27 See 37 CFR § 41.37(c)(vii) (“When multiple claims subject to the same ground
of rejection are argued as a group by appellant, the Board may select a single claim
from the group of claims that are argued together to decide the appeal with respect to
the group of claims as to the ground of rejection on the basis of the selected claim
alone.”).
28 The examiner reads the limitations of claim 17 prior amendment onto Stark at
pages 16-18 of the Final Office Action.
47
Page: Previous 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007