Appeal No. 2006-2461
Application No. 09/991,020
Akasheh’s Instrument Interface Module (IIM) setup window in Fig. 3c [answer,
page 12]. The examiner further contends, among other things, that the voltage
value that the user sets constitutes a selected one of a plurality of created
alternative specifications as claimed [id.].
Appellant responds that the term “specification” as used in the present
application means “the acceptable limits or tolerance against which the result of a
measurement is to be judged” [reply brief, page 4]. With this construction,
appellant argues that Akasheh does not disclose a specification of limits of
acceptability of a measurement result. Rather, Akasheh discloses that the script
transmitted to the instrument contains the voltage to which the instrument output
is to be set [reply brief, page 5].
We will sustain the examiner’s anticipation rejection of independent claims
1, 8, 16, and 21. Although we find the examiner’s reliance on the IIM setup
window in Fig. 3c problematic essentially for the reasons noted by appellant, we
nevertheless conclude that Akasheh fully meets all claimed limitations.
Akasheh discloses a computer based test operating system that tests a
unit under test (UUT) 114 with a number of different test instruments 112. An
advantage of Akasheh’s system is that it obviates the need to rewrite the test
program each time a test instrument is replaced. To this end, IIM acts as a layer
between the test program and instruments by translating inputs to the
instruments from the language used by the test program into a language or script
understandable by the new instrument [Akasheh, col. 2, lines 22-40].
5
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007