Appeal 2007-0279
Application 10/042,079
We reverse.
ISSUES
The pivotal issues in the appeal before us are as follows:
(1) Under 35 U.S.C. § 102(e), does Krishna anticipate the claimed invention
when Krishna teaches using declarations and interfaces of a first object-
oriented software program while excluding executable statements of the first
object-oriented software program to generate an interface (library stubs) for
compiling a second object-oriented software program?
(2) Under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a), would one of ordinary skill in the art at the
time of the present invention, have found that Krishna, taken in combination
with Green or Evans, renders the claimed invention unpatentable?
FINDINGS OF FACT
Appellant invented a method, system and computer program product
for using object-oriented software codes from a first software package (402)
to generate a generic compilation interface (432) to compile object-oriented
software codes for a second object-oriented software package (Specification
1, 15). Particularly, as depicted in figure 4, the invention identifies all public
classes and entities in the first object-oriented software package. Then, it
removes all references to the first software to subsequently generate
equivalent public classes and entities, which are used to generate the
compilation interface. (Specification 15).
Krishna discloses an interface (220) for compiling a second object-
oriented software program (180) from a first object-oriented software
4
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next
Last modified: September 9, 2013