Friday, May 06, 2011

BPAI doesn't accept text from technical article as to meaning of "graphics processing unit"

The allthingspros blog discussed the Brenner case, which concerned, in part, the unsuccessful attempt by patent applicant to use text from a journal article [Owens, in an IEEE journal] to define "graphics processing unit" [GPU]:

Appellants have not demonstrated error in the Examiner’s conclusion that the recited “graphics processing unit” is broad enough to read on Hamburg’s “programmable processor.” The reason is that Owens describes examples of GPUs without offering what can be accurately characterized as a broadest reasonable definition of that term.6 Furthermore, Appellants’ reliance on Owens’ discussion of “triangles” and the “fragments” generated thereby is misplaced in view of Owens’ description of triangles as “typical” rather than as essential: “The input to the input to the GPU is a list of
geometric primitives, typically triangles, . .” (emphasis added). Owens at 880, 2d col., 1st para. under heading “A. The Graphics Pipeline.”


Post a Comment

<< Home