CN110263931A - FSTP expert system - Google Patents

Abstract

As TT.p, significant item all " reference set " RS of " technical teaching " of patent or project, " the technical teaching TT.i " of the prior art, is rendered as with any " element " of any TT of its property description and all such information.Therefore, FSTP expert system support is managed TT.p relative to the analysis of RS, makes it possible to automatically and immediately reply to any any inquiry in such information.These answers can describe any correlation between any item or property/fact, perhaps it comments on such correlation or these opinions is obtained while generating these by FSTP expert system or interactively generating these with FSTP expert system for their certain opinions.

Description

FSTP expert system

(screening of the FSTP=fact and transform processor)

Seagram Shen Dele

The present patent application be the date of application be August in 2011 2, application No. is " 201180050182.8 ", denomination of invention For the divisional application of the application for a patent for invention of " FSTP expert system ".

As TT.p, " technical teaching ", " reference set " of " the technical teaching TT.i " of the prior art of patent or project RS, significant item is all rendered as with any " element " of any TT of its property description and all such information.Cause This, the support of FSTP expert system is managed TT.p relative to the analysis of RS, makes it possible to automatically and immediately reply pair Any any inquiry in such information.These answers can describe any phase between any item or property/fact Mutual relation, or the such correlation of comment or certain opinions for them, these opinions are by FSTP expert system It generates these or obtains while interactively generating these with FSTP expert system.Pass through the formal of these properties Change, FSTP expert system also supports the value of determination q, wherein if it relative to RS is not that q=0, q, which dependably indicate TT.p, It is important/obvious, " creative height of the TT.p relative to RS " is shown for q > 0, q and quantified the expression can not " ability " denied.I.e.: therefore, i) patent (or " common " project/" environmental protection " project/" health " item determined by q Mesh/" trade mark " project/" copyright " project) the smallest practical creative and ii compared with the existing technology) allow immediately to answer Multiple and i) related any inquiry.

I.The specification of FSTP expert system

FSTP system can be analyzed " traditional MoT " will occurring or having completed/and environmental protection/health/business/... Invention and associated document --- the patent (application) of the national patent system/prior art/technical ability/examination/lawsuit document And its precedent ... of the Supreme Judicial Court --- it is directed toIt indicatesIts unobviousness (including novelty) relative to the prior art The fact, it may be assumed thatIt does not determineThese problems.In order to determine such expression, use through base all disclosed in these documents All significant correlations between this information project are supported.That is, its support to notice first it is all disclosed basic Technology it is true, secondly they are transformed into technical secondary basic fact/semanteme innovated completely it is true/creativeness (actual effect) is true.Therefore, it determines between these disclosuresAllCorrelation, related Supreme Judicial Court's precedent and The influence that they indicate these.Therefore, FSTP expert system makes it possible toImmediatelyReply with these technologies indicate and Their any inquiries related for the dependence of basic disclosure (vice versa).That is, its concentration discusses expression invention (non-) apparent property these are innovativeIt is technicalThe secondary fact --- that is, it, which has ignored, is totally independent of the former And this it is irrespective it is non-technical on the secondary fact.

It discloses the function and its Technical Architecture of FSTP expert system with feasible mode.

As discussed in US 2008/0148143, US 2008/0178114, US 2010/0332285 at patent Reason.It has all been to assess in science patent since some time.I.F is shown to I.G chapters and sections: they for FSTP and Speech is all only far-out --- none of which refers to the patent with aforementioned capabilities/project expert system.

I.J chapters and sections disclose how FSTP solves the technical issues of such raw information obtains, to how to solve thing The technical issues of real sighting distance is screened/converted, these facts are answered with for the inquiry at once by combining existing system realization Multiple raw information is related --- and system is presented in database/communication/literature index and label/reasoning from logic/documentation management/document System --- " creative height " related inquiry especially with invention compared with the existing technology.I.K chapters and sections describe FSTP and exist Greatly simplify the potential in terms of the work of country PTO.I.L chapters and sections be related to FSTP be applied to " business "/" environmental protection "/" be good for Health "/... the applicability in terms of invention/project.In addition, I.M chapters and sections discuss FSTP's so as to link the arguement of pure law Required automation.

Fig. 1 a depicts the overall structure of FSTP, and these technical FSTP functions are described in detail in Fig. 1 b to Fig. 1 e The Technical Architecture of exemplary HW/SW embodiment (referring to I.J chapters and sections).Its user communicates with --- prior to executing FSTP analysis simultaneously And during executing FSTP analysis, communicate and communicated when he or FSTP need at any time as frequently as possible --- by 3 classes Interface is communicated: this 3 class interface is shown in the left side, right side and top of FSTP, for such as existing system in various presentations HW/SW/ communicate/presentation technology specified by come technology that input/output is such as obtained by means of it is true and/or by it at this The technology analyze, taken in the various context ontologies of the analysis is true and/or all these for indicating/modifying.This Body surface show with whatsoever related given knowledge --- herein for such as Patent Law, in relation to precedent, this field skill of invention The related given knowledge of art personnel --- it may include other ontologies that various Context Knowledges are presented, as described below.Ontology Generally fall into that so-called " ontology domain, OD " is (referring to " name in OD=ontology domain in the ellipse or other curves that indicate it in figure Claim ").The main ontology of two classes (related topics and context ontology, the ginseng as being input to it by correct interface is presented in FSTP See Fig. 2 a to Fig. 4 j, especially related theme and context ontology with " environmental protection/fitness programme ") medium and analysis most Terminate fruit.

The function to execute during executing FSTP analysis is confirmed with Fig. 5 a, and these execution are described in detail in Fig. 5 b The sequence of step (referring to II chapters and sections and III chapters and sections).

I.A Technologically true and practice technology is true for the understanding of the PTR of FSTP expert system

I.A.1- FSTP basic principle FSTP is needed for technical teaching (" TT.p ") to be analyzed and its that is claimed show There are the informal description and formal description of technical teaching (" TT.i ").Herein and hereinafter, term " formal " is not The use for meaning mathematic sign (referring to chapters and sections I.A.3), means, a TT description is referred to as " just in the following cases Formula ": TT description

A, B, C, D ... are determined as the element (element) of the TT.p of document p by ■,

A.i, B.i, C.i, D.i ... are determined as in (document i (document.i), i=1,2,3 ...) TT.i by ■ With the element of these TT.p element equities, and

X) .n, X.i) .n is determined as these elements X/X.i=A/A.i, B/B.i, C/C.i by ■ ... property/category Property¹⁴⁾, n=1,2,3 ...,

Wherein it is determined that these multiple descriptions¹²⁾It is inessential absolutely not, therefore hereinafter can carefully discuss, particularly, note Anticipate to TT.p do not have certain property may as noticing it with another property it is important.

" technical teaching, TT.p " are the solution to the problem to be solved to the patent to the term of known patent (application) Function description, still, be also used to indicate herein to solves the problems, such as give project any type any method function It can description.

It now focuses on discuss that the TT.p of patent (for specific project is similarly defined, referring to chapters and sections I.L), and is indicated Are as follows:

" reference set, RS " disclose the set of each TT.i of their document i, indicate the prior art of the TT.p ■.

■ " technical basis, the informal fact " is to any TT and its relevant nature

Natural language description.

■ " technical basis, the formal fact " utilize the above X/X.i and X) .n/X.i) .n to their progress just Formula description.

■ " technical material fact " these X.i) .n and X) between .n "It is expected that/inexpectancy and non-contradiction/contradiction,ANC" relationship (well known to the U.S. " Graham technology essential factor ", without herein accurate), or " these X) .n and X.i) .n it is general Between the refinement of thoughtization " "It is expected that/inexpectancy and non-contradiction/contradiction,ANC" relationship is (referring to chapters and sections I.A.4-E, II.A.1.3- II.A.1.4)。

■ or less any " PTR " (=" <TT.p,RS > to ") " it is technical secondary, basic/semantic/wound The fact that the property made ":

● well known technical secondary " substantially " fact, is the simple meaning of these Graham technology facts.

● innovation, technical secondary " semanteme " is true (also known as " plcs " is true), it is pair of two ingredients, That is:

1.)TT.p¹⁶⁾" semantic height (also known as plcs height), i.e. Q relative to RS^plcs" (the language in plcs=Patent Law Justice).The measurement unit of plcs height is the " consideration unrelated with plcs^10),14)": at least need Q^plcsSuch consideration is for from RS⁺It begins look for¹⁴⁾TT.p.It is, if without q < Q^plcs, then in the presence of unrelated with plcs " it is expected that combining, AC "¹⁴⁾With q " concept modification, 1-cM "¹⁴⁾, wherein " AC/mod (q-cM)ants TT.p”(ants: it is expected that).

2.)“Q^plcsSet of paths, i.e. Q^plcs- PS " is all " Q^plcsThe set of-AC set ", each Q^plcs- AC set All<x, y>pair set, wherein x is Q^plcs- AC, y are about the Q^plcs-AC¹⁴⁾All Q^plcsThe set of-cM.

● innovation, technical secondary " creativeness " is true (also known as " actual effect " is true, and also known as " pmgp " is true), It is similar pair below:

1.) its TT.p¹⁶⁾" creative height (also known as pmgp height), i.e. Q relative to its RS^pmgp" (pmgp=is authorized specially The actual effect of sharp exclusive right).The measurement unit of pmgp height is identical with more than, but Q^plcs- cM is influenced by pmgp now, this can be with So that Q^pmgpBecome<or>=Q^plcs(referring to I.A.5 and I.B.2 chapters and sections).

2.)“Q^pmgpSet of paths, i.e. Q^pmgp- PS " is similar to Q^plcs- PS, wherein all elements pmgp¹⁴⁾It has been be recognized that, Wherein, it can derive that these secondary technologies are true in " D level/B level " two levels that the fact is presented.

The relevant element/property of PTR only describe it is in its TT, in its FSTP analysis for distinguishing TT.p and TT.i group It closes¹⁴⁾Those required to property.Not so, the quantity of property to be described, can indigestion/management.Empirical method about PTR analysis It is then: in the case where the meaningless situation of the PTR will not be made, initially omits property as much as possible, then in these properties by FSTP When user notices and is determined as related to FSTP analysis, increase their quantity.It is special before chapters and sections I.E and in FSTP In family's system guide, the selection and refinement of these relevant natures is described in detail.

Fig. 2 a to Fig. 2 d is to first 4 in preceding 5 sides point and their ideograph structures are by being visualized. The knowledge of these structural supports " PTR ontology " is presented comprising D-ANCMatrix/B-ANCMatrix is (referring to following I.B chapters and sections and figure 2b), it is established during analyzing PTR by FSTP expert system, as " working set, the major part of the content of WS " is (referring to I.J With II.A.1.3/4 chapters and sections).Left edge before in Fig. 2 a to Fig. 2 e in two width figures determined the PTR to<TT.p, RS>, it is right Edge has determined its corresponding D attribute (D-Attribute)/B attribute on " D level/B level fact is presented " defined below (B-Attribute).The set of horizontal rectangular has determined corresponding technical formal brass tacks, and horizontal ellipse determines The entirety (referring to thin arrow) of " concept " mentioned by them, explained below.Fig. 2 b is with bold arrows show D-ANCSquare Battle array/B-ANCThe technical material fact of matrix, arrow represent 3 component relationships " it is expected that " in/" inexpectancy "/" contradiction " One, be indicated generally between attribute " ANC " (here,ContradictionIt is peripheral issue).The D-X.i of Fig. 2 b)/D-X) .n obtains D-ANCMatrix, Fig. 2 c to Fig. 2 e show D-ANCMatrix becomes B-ANCThe transformation of matrix¹⁰⁾(referring to I.A.4-1.E chapters and sections and II.A.1.3-II.A.1.4 chapters and sections).

5th side's point, the i.e. innovative technical secondary fact, it is extremely complex for visualization.For not It is wrong, extremely weary to determine that technical secondary basic fact can be prone to unessential PTR, completely " manual " Taste and imperfect --- manually determine that its technical secondary plcs fact is practically impossible (referring to I.A.4- I.E chapters and sections).FSTP passes through technical secondary the plcs fact and pmgp thing for correctly and fully supporting to determine the PTR It is real and very helpful --- including inspection/realization " plcs independence and pmgp independence " (referring to I.A.5 chapters and sections).The two The fact is that accordingly to " < Q^xxxx, Q^xxxx_PS > ", xxxx=plcs or=pmgp (referring to I.B.2 chapters and sections), in which:

■Q^xxxxIt is digital 0,1,2,3 ..., xxxx height of the referred to as TT.p of the PTR relative to its RS, and

■Q^xxxx_PS is all to < Q^xxxx_AC, all Q^xxxx_The set of cM, wherein Q^xxxx_AC/mod(Q^xxxx_ cM)antsTT.p > set.

Compared with the well-known Graham fact of PTR, the technical secondary plcs fact/pmgp of PTR is true Be its TT.p quality relative to the much better instruction of its RS (non-) apparent property innovative indicator.They are solely Stand on TT.p it is technical or non-technical on theme (no matter what meaning term " technical " should have)."PTR Problem " is the problem of obtaining them from the PTR.

The instruction ability of these indicators is with Q^pmgp(Q^plcsAlready existing Q^pmgp) value increase and increase, however Substantially it is also used for Q^pmgp=0 and/or Q^plcs=0 (referring to I.B.2 chapters and sections and I.M chapters and sections).

The Q of the pmgp fact of I.o.w.:PTR^pmgp>=1 value is the expression of the patentability of its TT.p, this is because its " forward position in some useful field Q is pushed into backward^pmgpThe distance of inventive idea " if --- obtain patent right hair It is bright to be foreseen in the field.That is: Q^pmgp(>=or≤Q^plcs) value quantified the TT.p and be also known as relative to the creative height of the RS Pmgp height, so that the expression ability for also determining the expression (such as passes through Q^pmgpWhat-PS was proved in detail).

I.A.2Here, will be apparent from, the innovative of the patent application uses the necessity of-FSTP expert system Cut edge knowledge engineering, language, logic and IT technological sciences solve the problems, such as PTR, that is, indicate the (non-) aobvious of patent to determine And the innovative technology of being clear to property is true.These exquisite facts are since (non-) in even " simple " case is aobvious and easy Opinion property problem intrinsic national complexity/psychology complexity¹⁴⁾Although interested complexity is not also real so far It recognizes on ground.Now, for the technical staff of PTR analysis field, reliably grasp this challenge be still it is impossible, Unless using FSTP technology.

The MPEP of USPTO, 2141 chapters and sections provide determining in processing for the simpleness inevitable so far and indicate A good example in terms of the problem of the fact that (non-) of TT.p apparent property.Here, USPTO is only summarised What Supreme law court has determined that in its 1966 direction instruction Graham and John Deere is determined --- without Become to knowCorrectly and fullyExecute (non-) apparent property analysis in this way, that is, not other technology and By the way that natural language (natural languages of those skilled in the art) are used only, it is technically in the theory of knowledge/linguistics logistics/IT It is impossible^5),14),15).The recent renewal of MPEP instruction, i.e. its 2141 new chapters and sections not yet simplify the problem and (but estimate Other important problems related with the exclusiveness of MoT test, referring to I.A.6 chapters and sections).

I.A.3The new basic terms of-FSTP technology/express the meaning and rethought for a long time using FSTP expert system requests The term of well known various keys/express the meaning, such as their " disclosure " in " TT ", the attribute " X) .n " of element " X ", document And " concept " involved in attribute --- or even expressing the meaning for their " independence " is well known at all.Remaining of I.A chapters and sections Part has exceeded this and rethinks, and introduces other term/express the meaning.Although its usual table involved in chapters and sections later Detailed description in meaning, although however its for the first time read when be not fully appreciated that --- it provides the base new with these Some related first investigation in this idea.

I.A chapters and sections are disclosed to I.F chapters and sections/discussion/defines " parsing " of FSTP expert system and is also known as " the theory of knowledge " basic term// function of expressing the meaning --- its " 1. " center " of knowledge transformation.

As disclosed in this 6 chapters and sections of chapters and sections I.G to M, " 2. " center "s of knowledge transformation handle its " actual " base This term// function of expressing the meaning.By 1. centers, the answer at once of 2. center implementations FSTP and PTR and all input to it Its context-sensitive --- that is, not only related with its TT, also with its all context correlation in relation to --- all conjunctions The ability of the inquiry of reason.Therefore, 2. centers of knowledge transformation disclose by they existing technical interface realize it is various Existing and not compatible but common technical information system to be used/communication system/storage system/fetches system/is in The very specific comprehensive purposes of existing system.

Therefore, two centers of knowledge transformation are completely different from each other, and are both based on being configured to the patent Shen Function please, without presenting or only up to considering until now elsewhere.

Above content shows: the processing pair in the FSTP analysis of its PTR of 1. centers of the knowledge transformation of FSTP expert system At least two classes of the relevant nature of the TT of the PTR describe: from that the former obtains and technical basic with identical meanings " informal " true and technical basic " formal " true (referring to I.C to E chapters and sections).The informal fact is only It is the reference (according to the requirement of precedent) of the disclosure of the property of element, and these property descriptions are conduct by the formal fact The attribute of the logic sum of better simply property, therefore obtained from the text of disclosure, without changing their meaning --- It will be approved by those skilled in the art.The above attribute X) .n/X.i) .n is to be related to such formal table of " concept/value " Show and (mathematical symbolism need not be used) (referring to I.A.4 to I.A.5 chapters and sections).Therefore, in the FSTP analysis of PTR, to all The identical related attribute of its related peer element X/X.i has carried out at least twice --- i.e. informal and formal --- Description.It is designed according to the usual IT system that passes through¹⁵⁾Come the theory of knowledge reaffirmed⁵⁾, for a long time it is well known that: can be only Iteratively dependably realize the description of all properties of " being noted " and " independent " all " in relation to " functions Essential accuracy.

Note: the FSTP of PTR being analyzed, is that its TT.p is provided for determining all related X and its property X) .n Basis, i.e.,In the terminology of the analysis/express the meaning on " coordinate system ".Therefore, TT.p is defined also in its TT.i It middle search and determines term to be used when their counterpart and expresses the meaning.

I.A.4" concept ", which is presented, in the concept of-PTR and its D level/B level fact of FSTP technology can indicate anything Feelings, that is, " xxxx ", no matter " xxxx " is represented --- such as attribute X.i) .n⁵⁾Or " idea "⁵⁾--- if there is only following associations Fixed: it is usually understood⁵⁾(therefore: " fully simple ").Concept has at any time also known as " is worth " " instantiation " Estimation, have a series of values for being known as its " range ", and if range includes T and F, be referred to as " binary system ".If " TT.0 " indicates that TT.p, " range, U (X.i) .n) " indicate X.i) set of all values of concept C.k involved in .n.Then, appoint What X.i) .n can be viewed as relative to U (X.i) .n) binary concept." X.i) .n truth set, TS (X.i) .n) " The X.i being defined as in TT.i) U (X.i) .n involved in .n) subset.

FSTP analyzes expressing the meaning based on the concept^10),14)(hereinafter and in I.B being described in detail into E chapters and sections).

Only for explanation: concept can indicate^10),14)--- usually omitting D prefix/B prefix herein and later ---

■ " physics in " problem, such as " time " or " space " or " scale " or " spectrum " or " specific time " or " certain Position in a space " or " size of scale " or " color of spectrum " or " position of the something in some space " or ....

In physics, TS (X.i) .n) it is known as " system " X.i relative to " coordinate system ") any embodiment of .n " state diagram ", the set of the concept involved in the system define.Therefore, TS (X.i) .n) in arbitrary point indicate X.i) the corresponding state of the embodiment of .n.

■ " physics is external " problem, i.e., " logical problem/application/objective/user/invention/... it is inherent " problem, such as " attribute " or " quality " or " feeling " or " endurance " or " feature of construction " or " feature of the prior art " or ....

In TS (X.i) .n) context in, be seldom referred to as " coordinate system " relative to the set as concept and Present " system " X.i) .n " state diagram ".Really it is expressed the meaning using these⁵⁾Although carrying out table to them with other terms Show.

Summarize first such as subsequent paragraph and I.B.1 chapters and sections are explained in detail, which is support TS (X.i) .n) tupel PTR¹⁴⁾, and presented using two different coordinate systems its TT.p, relative to they it is existing There is the RS of technology, that is, the D level coordinate system defined by D level concept set and B level concept set the two set and B layers Grade coordinate system.Therefore, arbitrary point in TS (PTR) indicate the embodiment of TT.p state or as TT.i " plcs is closest " it is expected the state of combined embodiment, Q^plcs- AC, that is, so that its Q^plcsIt is minimum.

For PTR, concept by FSTP user for he to the descriptions of all properties of the X of the TT.p of PTR with they Attribute, i.e. X) .n --- other concepts do not allow --- that is, be state PTR X.i) .n premise, to determine.It is stating These X.i) before .n, with natural language and/or corresponding document i¹⁾Figure these properties are disclosed.

The fact that term used in these original disclosures/express the meaning referred to as " disclosure level, D level ", is presented, And define and be related to " D concept, D-C.k " value " D attribute, D-X.i) .n ".User is the fact determining D level in terms of presentation There is certain flexibility.Concentrating and PTR, the D-X.i of PTR be discussed) .n may be defined as the joint of simple attribute, that is, arbitrarily in this way Summand only relate to a D-C.k (referring to II.B and III chapters and sections).

Solve the problems, such as the fact that PTR usually requires that its other level presentation, referred to as " B level "¹⁰⁾.It is by the property of TT.p It is rendered as only relating to the binary attribute of single B concept.That is, solve the problems, such as PTR usually require that by " D attribute, D-X.i) .n " (relates to And " D concept, D-C.k ") be transformed into " B attribute, B-X.i) .n " as the joint of binary attribute each only relates to one two " B concept, B-C.k ", also, any B-C.k are only involved by such binary attribute for system concept.Therefore, this claims For " B summand " and it is equal to B-C.k.

Here, the transformation is presented to provide with the D level of PTR, it may be assumed that by the summand of its D-X) .n as B-C.k¹⁰⁾.This Can make certain D-X.i) .n and D-C.k are remained unchanged, and only they are renamed¹⁰⁾。

Any B concept obtains two titles, and also known as id, as shown in Fig. 2 c to 2e: its " FSTP title/id " is uniquely to go here and there B-C.k, k=1,2,3 ... (as used), and its " TT.p title/id " is the short self-described of its meaning.k¹⁰⁾。 These meanings should also be as being agreed, because of arbitrary D-X) .n be using only basic logic, by the public affairs of the D-C.k to reach an agreement Open the summand of content and disclosure (as understood by those skilled in the art, wherein if D-X) .n of document p It is very simple, then can agree to, seem just so in the case where many TT.p) constitute.

Theory of knowledge difference between two levels is: discussing in the inevitable D level complete set first of PTR correct Ground understands its TT.p (referring to II.A.1.1-II.A.1.2 chapters and sections), and B level makes great efforts to obtain the brass tacks of TT.p and the base of RS The most simple and most clearly presentation of all technical differences between this fact.That is, D level concentration talks the matter over, and B layers Grade concentrates the relationship discussed between these events.

D level and B level have obtained TT.p and have expressed the meaning relative to (D/B) " the plcs height/pmgp height " of RS --- Although I.A.5 chapters and sections explain to: D, which expresses the meaning to bring, is hidden in D-X.i) the natural language disclosure of .n⁵⁾In several hearts Reason problem, so that its D-Q^plcs/Q^pmgpIt is problematic.That is: if can prove that these D levels have been not present in D level asks Topic --- afterwards usually possible, then B level is excessive.

Now, there is only the fact that D level in (non-) of PTR apparent property analysis to be presented.Therefore, Graham is true Unofficial present usually only preliminarily is understood very much --- this is usually inevitable in the case where natural language is used only 's^5),15),16), but regardless of according to the understanding in relation to technology (referring to I.C to I.E chapters and sections).That is: the psychology that the D level of PTR is presented Complexity can keep being not taken care, and indicate judicial default.These can be presented by the fact that the B level of the FSTP of PTR To avoid.That is, it presents the PTR problem relative to its B level --- rather than the simple natural language of its D level, In, natural language by just explained the TT.p concrete term reached an agreement/expressing the meaning extends.Therefore, now, it can choose this A little coordinate systems as PTR presentation, in addition, their attribute of the X relative to PTR is the joint of B summand --- its Greatly simplifie the analysis of the PTR (as shown in chapters and sections I.A.5).

I.A.5Reduce the other Key Term of PTR the complex nature of the problem and FSTP technology/express the meaning for most of PTR, attribute X.i) .n ---OnlyBetween indicating that its TT.p combination is combined with TT.iIt is relatedDifference --- be it is simple, This is because they only describe these differences.Therefore, X.i) .n do not need description realize TTs machine repertoire, and Only need to describe TT.p combination in be different from TT.i combination in those of function.

Extracted if be not carried out from the attribute block for analyzing unrelated TTs with FSTP --- that is, an if people Non resistance everyone temptation is to specify all elements/attribute of TTs, for based on these X.i) .n creates TT.p machine It is target that is required, being not present herein for device/TT.i machine function --- then, it can not be kept away by complete endless processing The target captured with exempting from is (greatly based on technical ability¹⁾, and be not based on determine such X.i completely) the PTR document of .n defines Disclosure²⁾.This can not dependably be managed with simple natural language, such as according to HW/SW system specification it is found that and More basicly⁵⁾--- and last is usually unrelated anyway.

Therefore, these formal essential attributesIt is necessaryIgnore element/property/concept of these TT understanding machine --- i.e. All these element/property/concept blocks of the TTs of PTR, not to its X.i) .n and equity X) .n based on plcs (D/B) " inexpectancy " relationship minimum sum (relative to all AC¹⁴⁾) contribute: because of them and its (D/B) Q^plcs Value it is unrelated.This will be explained in the following paragraphs.

First: these expressing the meaning based on plcs can be depended on applied to the result of PTR:

Understanding of the ■ to its patent, that is, the X.i in corresponding specification) .n disclosure meaning really It is fixed^1),2),14)(in EPC, must cannot be contradicted with the meaning of the term in their corresponding claim) and/or

■antsThe definition of relationship (e.g., in NPS, independently of the analysis of the above specific PTR).

For PTR, property/X of TT.p) .n is known as " may be related " if --- until plcs --- its RS includes TT.i

■ its explicitly or implicitly¹⁾It disclosesantsX ') .n ' X ' .i) .n ', and

■ is for other X) .n, the TT.i is explicitly or implicitly¹⁾

Zero or absolutely not disclose equity X.i) .n (or even eliminating it),

It zero or disclosesnot-antsX) .n's is (unique¹²⁾) equity X.i) .n,

Wherein, the property/X.i) .n must only be defined as guaranteeing the relationship (referring to II.C chapters and sections).Otherwise, X) .n claims For " uncorrelated " and exclude except the other analysis of PTR.

PTR analysis in the X with TT.p (also known as TT.0)) .n (also known as X.0) .n) and it is associated express the meaning it is related 6 mark Remember as follows:

I) in EPC, clearly and/or impliedly¹⁾Disclosed X.i) .n must cannot contradict with main claim.i (referring to I.B.1 chapters and sections).

Ii) by this definition, TT.i is incoherent for the FSTP of PTR analysis, if without X.i) .n expection The X of its equity) .n.

Iii) X) the expressing the meaning for " possible relevance " of .n be therefore, only to handle Q based on plcs^pmgpValue X) .n The necessary premise of increase, this must be sufficient (referring to I.B.2 chapters and sections).This is equally applicable to Q^plcsIf X) .n Plcs independence is not evaluated (see below).

Iv) if some X) .n is X) .n ' and the X) joint of .n ", and the latter only passes through TT.k's ' and TT.k " X.k ') .n ' and X.k ") .n " is expected, wherein 0 < k ' ≠ k ", then X) .n is possible to related^14).B。

V) X) .n possible relevance the problem of by FSTP test with FSTP user interactively or its own from Can determine that dynamicly --- the latter is in all X.i) .n ' logically automatically set up in accessible situation by it.

Vi) which X) .n is possible to related unavailable according only to its TT.p in PTR analysis, but depend on it TT.i.That is, by any document i for being added to RS, other TT.p property/X) .n is it may be possible to become related.Therefore, may be used To prove, TT.p is explicitly or implicitly¹⁾Disclosed property/X) .n

Zero has been the property that is related however being not yet noted that has been possible to of the TT.p in original PTR, and/or

Zero TT.i contradicted by no disclosure or even with it by TT.p be limited to a TT.i (its it is original or The TT.i of the PTR of person's extension).

Therefore, the quantity of the relevant property of the possibility of PTR can iteratively increase, because of showing by understanding TT.p and RS There is other difference (e.g., due to the repeating/X) .n between technology and therefore detect the difference, that is, improves for PTR problem Understanding), document (document) is added into RS.

For PTR, property/X of TT.p) .n is known as " noticing " --- independently of its explicit or implicit disclosure Content, that is, if its be uttered in the text of document p disclosure --- related those of ordinary skill recognizes that it has It may be related.Determine whether notice the relevant X of possibility of TT.p in the FSTP analysis of PTR by FSTP user) in .n Any one.Now, the optimal method of possibility for assessing the judgement is: attempting the alternative text of the difference between description TT.p and TT.i Word, to find the relevant X with possibility being not yet noted by the redundancy) .n.

May relevant X) .n is known as " actually related " --- referred to as " correlation " if --- X) .n is not to use at least One X ') .n ' come plcs expression (referring to I.B.1 chapters and sections).For PTR, it is all may relevant X) set of .n can be with Include relevant X) the different maximum sets (may automatically can determine by FSTP analyst) of .n.Therefore, each remaining X) .n is incoherent (referring to above content).Here interested to be only: if PTR can be presented in B level, X) .n Plcs indicates that problem is easy to solve, therefore, any B-X) .n be exactly equal to only one B-C.k (referring to above content) and Their mutual independence should be by related those of ordinary skill easily susceptible of proof.

Note: the relevant X of PTR) .n for its technical secondary innovation the fact influence can be and determine completely Qualitatively, because not noticing that it can be with --- (referring to I.B.2 chapters and sections) due to various pmgp --- so that its TT.p Significantly more than its RS^14).F, and therefore make its patent invalid.Therefore, if by challenging, the owner of the patent must effort Ground is determining and the complete set of its all relevant fact is presented.On the other hand: law court puts behind one relevant X) .n may be Many countries violate the constitutional right of the owner.

For PTR, if all X of its TT.p) .n is related,ANCMatrix --- as just relative to it The AC of the TT.i of RS¹⁴⁾--- it is known as " independently of plcs ".That is:ANCThe plcs independence of matrix and the plcs independence of any AC Defined herein relative to the set of TT.p attribute --- it is not attempt to define their plcs independence " in this way " herein.As above It is described, either in D level still in B level, PTR independently of plcs'sANCMatrix need not be unique.However, opposite In it independently of plcs'sANCThe final amt of matrix, Q^plcsValue be minimal definition¹⁴⁾。

The B level of PTR is easier its analysis, for very novel TT.p.It is namely

■ ensure that the Q of PTr^plcsSimplicity, correctness and integrality (all attentions about its TT.p of the determination of value The property arrived), and

■ passes through its Q^plcs- PS provides pmgp to be checked^-Existing exclusive path, that is, check Q^pmgp<Q^plcs.As for Very innovative TT.p, still without pmgp^-14).E, this is all to set up for its any PTR: Q^pmgp≥Q^plcs(referring to I.B.2 chapters and sections).

I.o.w.: ignore pmgp and first against PTR determine its instruct plcs fact provide it is unknown so far for The opinion of the structure of its apparent property problem: that is, it is clearly disclosed, plcs has been determined for pointing out that its (non-) is aobvious and easy The necessary condition of the idea of opinion property, and --- other than the instruction --- pmgp determines their adequate condition thus.Directly To current, Patent Law works does not know the method specified in this way of construction all set reasonably disputed on related with PTR, this Realize the function of FSTP expert system.

Five kinds of remarks of terms above/express the meaning, especially " plcs "/" pmgp " and " D level/B level " are finished I.A.5 chapters and sections:

Vii) here, pmgp^-It only include technical ability, science, precedent (referring to I.B.2 chapters and sections), plcs includes " absolutely basis It is effective ", e.g., science/engineering/mathematics/... common and basis knowledge --- and, pmgp^-It can change only to fit For pmgp can be influenced^-Certain q-cM of independence.

Viii) someone may be attracted is considered as plcs technical and pmgp is considered as on non-technical, because Pmgp does not contribute the plcs fact, and only quantifies 1-cM.This viewpoint be it is wrong, because of 1-cM (that is, plcs is true Basis) technical (referring to I.A.6 chapters and sections) are needed not be, and pmgp can be technical (referring to I.B.2 chapters and sections).

Ix) on plcs and pmgp, there is the other kinds of patent actual effect currently rapidly developed, e.g., " patent Asset securitization " is effective and " TT.p motivation " is effective.In addition, they can depend on the patent contribution of PTR analysis Its big Q^pmgpValue, and can be complementary to one another, wherein for patent official document

The interests that zero patent securitization actual effect defines possible patent generate the measurement function of potentiality, and close And these possible values of the official document of patent, and

Zero patent motivation actual effect indicate for they asset securitization actual effect positive influence (such as make they Attract attention in their service life) and negative effect (such as make they due to technology development usual situation without innovate Property) --- this influences the above asset securitization measurement function again.

X) it is unprecedented for PTR problem being transformed into its B level: so far, by problem from a coordinate system transformation To another coordinate system such as physically well known existing coordinate system (referring to I.E chapters and sections) --- rather than it is only fixed by problem itself The non-coordinate system of justice.

Xi) in Patent Law document, most of above express the meaning all are unknown or do not know, although wherein each right In have an opportunity to understand (non-) apparent property problem it is intricate for be vital: arranged from the discussion of this problem In addition to one of those is kept off in simple natural language, and deprive its intrinsic structure based on precedent --- because This so that its return to it is unclear^5),15).This other mode is put aside: these terms/express the meaning belong to and will occur The basis of " patent law technology ", two pillar provide herein, indicated with 1. centers of knowledge transformation and 2. centers (referring to I.A.3/I.H chapters and sections).

I.A.6Determine PTR's in view of the FSTP expert system of nearest EU/US precedentANCThe pmgp independence of matrix and The test that plcs independence must cannot be misinterpreted as the FSTP expert system of the PTR is

I) " contribution methods " patent is practiced as to understand --- referring to " the Enlarged Board of Appeal " of EPO, Case G 03/08,12.05.2010,10.4-10.13 chapters and sections --- with determination " the principle of the present invention " or

Ii) only submit " ... abstract theory is described with mathematical equation ", such as US Supreme law court on June 28th, 2010 Discussed in its Bilski judgement, with refusal, " machine or transformation, the exclusiveness of MoT " test is as the acquirement for invention The indicator of the qualification of patent.

Determine as EU and US determines the two judgements, for FSTP expert system, it is genuine for contradicting.

About i): the priori knowledge in (independently of plcs's) PTR analysis is practiced as " entirety side by FSTP expert system Method ", as the opinion of EPO is understood --- the possible reduction of the FSTP of the plcs fact of PTR to its pmgp fact is clear Ground confirms this whole view, rather than " contribution methods " viewpoint.That is, FSTP analyzer understanding TT.p's is any independently of plcs Property, including as attribute X) .n ' and X) the united X of .n ") .n, in addition, if the two is all by existing technical literature k ' Proposed by (document.k ') and document k " (document.k ") (referring to I.A.5.ii chapters and sections).In contrast, for opposite The X can be omitted from the beginning in the contribution methods of its RS analysis TT.p) .n (as proposed by RS), it is thus impossible to enough Determine X) two attributes of relevant TT.p in the PTR of .n.

The reason of country of contribution methods for patent understanding lacks is: it is mixed with plcs and expresses the meaning and (negatively) Actual effect expresses the meaning, pmgp^-.Therefore, at the end of its, consider at the beginning that patent is explained from the plcs fact of its PTR Except at least one X) .n attribute without rationally to the consideration carry out defense be legal.That is, by using with for invention The creative value of isolated contribution it is related it is (insecure) feel, control of the adapter tube before returning back to for arguement Reasonability, these pass through X) .n is as some of which.Recognize priori related with contribution isolated in this way feels it is extremely Different from the effective thing of clearly definable/definition, Patent Law is based on the actual effect and generates (referring to I.B.2 chapter Section).

That is: it is as follows not determine that all related plcs properties of TT.p compared with the existing technology result in first for contribution methods Disadvantage: it has simply skipped by proving pmgp^-The necessity forced of existing reasonability, that is, abandon through unclear sense Feel to determine --- FSTP test is forbidden and the adhering to for integral viewpoint to problem.

About ii): 2. centers of the FSTP expert system of knowledge transformation, i.e., " ... instruct the use of<FSTP>analytical technology In the purposes (referring to page 3 and 12 to 15 sections) for helping the certain inputs established in the input into equation ", wherein it is " abstract 1. centers of the knowledge transformation of theory, with mathematical equation description " support FSTP ES.That is: its function can not be reduced to only It is somebody's turn to do " abstract theory ", because the function at 2. centers of knowledge transformation is completely new and never related with pmgp.

However, these reductions will be at issue as follows indispensable: remaining function of FSTP expert system is only known Know the function at 1. centers of transformation.Its impossibility, which eliminates, to be pointed out: FSTP ES be only abstract theory, mathematics " equation ", its The technical secondary creativeness of TT.p is true.That is: FSTP ES is suitable for patentability --- such a 1. center is not indicated Function be not patentability.

That is, 1. center is " tachymetric investigates instrument (including even certain creation process in the theory of knowledge) ", that is, It can be applied not only to determine the height that some is put relative to its ambient enviroment, with usually.However, it is determining PTR TT.p is relative to the semantic height of RS around it and the HW/SW tachymetric investigation instrument of creative height (referring to I.E chapter The middle section of section), it is, the text by the TT.p of PTR relative to the height of the literal disclosure of the height of its RS Disclosure on word is transformed into value Q^plcsAnd Q^pmgp(semantic height/effective height of the description TT.p relative to RS).Therefore, It is that really novel tachymetric investigates instrument, is, these disclosures are also transformed into the RS from the PTR⁺It arrives All shortest paths of its TT.p, that is, be transformed into all Q of semantic height/effective height of TT.p^plcs/Q^pmgpRoad Diameter set --- automatically, interactively.

That is, FSTP expert system includes two HW/SW machines: in its 1.tachymetric machine as shown in Fig. 1 d to 1e On the basis of, 2. machines are established, the former knowledge is transformed into the intelligible information of user at once.The two machines are having Pass never refers in the prior art.

I.B PTR's and its AC's the ANC relationship based on plcs/logics --- and the type of pmgp

I.B.1To being rendered as D/B-ANCThe D/B- of matrixANCRelationship mathematically carries out formalized

In any NPS, basic expressing the meaning be the property of the TT.i of PTR and the property of its TT.p "It is expected that" relationship, because This, sometimes referred to as "antsRelationship ".Not-antsRelationship andcontradictsRelationship be previous relationship it is apparent in logic Inference, the latter is the former amplification.

Completely by this "ants" express the meaning need PTR present in there are two level information:

■ D level, needs the patent problem for describing to be solved, and invention actually solves the problems, such as this, and, it should Solution TT.p^1),14)Element and its property --- its and the text to the patent of TT.p by be based on priori knowledge, i.e., It by the term of its claim and expresses the meaning and the term of specification and expresses the meaning, although may need related technical staff's (and may need Patent Law and its precedent) certain detailed description and interpretations, situation depend on being more or less unique --- and

■ B level is adapted to determine that plcs height and/or pmgp height of its TT.p relative to its RS, therefore must be bright Really point out in D level continually in unconspicuous TT.p all properties --- it must be defined by FSTP user, Usually defined as described in I.A.4 chapters and sections by the understandable transformation for D level term/express the meaning.

I.B.1 chapters and sections are mathematically defined by determining specific relationship for PTR for D level ./B levelantsRelationship, that is, it is based only upon Patent Law and has modeled basic structure semantically, therefore, referred to as " semanteme in Patent Law, plcs".Above-mentioned specific relationship is as follows:

■ is firstly, be its original X.i) .n and its X) .n relationship ---antsThis part of relationship is rendered asANCSquare Battle array --- and

■ is secondly, be these original X.i) certain basic modifications (having modified 1-cM) of .n and identical X) .n pass System,

Wherein, the component of the structure is based only upon the rudimentary knowledge and common sense of science again^14).D。

Therefore, as one of ordinary skill in the understanding,antsRelationship has taken into consideration only inside PTR¹⁾Property (packet Include the prior art property for having modified 1-cM sequence).Therefore, in addition toantsExcept relationship, in addition I.B.2 chapters and sections describe as follows Consider: it is entirely outside PTR¹⁾: it is by the actual effect for the granted patent exclusive right that can define on the semantic structure Pmgp estimates these sequences (the 0,1,2,3 of prior art property ... 1-cM sequence).

In system design for the use of well-known " using level ", determining indicates TT.p relative to some prior art The technology fact of (non-) apparent property handles three layers of expressing the meaning: " actual effect of granted patent exclusive right, pmgp " are not having “antsThe plc semanteme of relationship " express the meaning in the case where be it is unaccountable, do not have " scientific rudimentary knowledge and common sense, Ceks " is unaccountable in the case where expressing the meaning.That is: pmgp layers uses plcs layers, and plcs layers use ceks layers.

The pmgp of PTR is important as its plcs under the law mean, because it is social limitation/economic restriction, at it Under, the construction of TT.p is legally considered to have novelty.However, the invention of the TT.p must have been carried out first.Cause This,ANCThe mathematical definition of relationship is given first --- and also as current, only handling plcs is simple mathematical activity, is worked as It is modern to be not yet applied to processing pmgp.

Two label/prompts (presenting about D level fact presentation/B level fact) of front are critically important:

■ is since the incorrect fact of D level is presented, e.g., due to being related to the D attribute of several D concepts (in document p It is exactly in this way that the natural language of the property of TT.p, which discloses usually), any plcs dependence is reliably checked in the D of PTR is presented And accurately remove any plcs dependence from the D of PTR expression may be highly difficult.As explained in I.A.4 chapters and sections, B The D attribute that level should carry out " refining " TT.p using only common sense/basic science is presented.That is: it needs to have related technical staff's It is not that D-X) .n/X.i) .n is transformed into B-X) .n/X.i) .n, still, the technical ability is finally or needs are for correct first Ground obtain TT.p (referring to^14).FWith II.A.1.1-II.A.1.2 chapters and sections).Therefore, by realizing and requiring based on based on TT.p Concept different sets at least TT.p carry out redundancy description (referring to I.A.4 chapters and sections), B level support evaluation PTR FSTP The first step of analysis is correctly and completely executed.

The original natural language disclosure of TT.p is translated into restricted natural language initially by ■, such as ACE (referring to I.C and I.E chapters and sections) also (should be different from D- by providing a variety of different D disclosuresANCMatrix is to B-ANCMatrix with up conversion) support the evaluation --- however, current, the initial transformation of D disclosure to such as ACE do not have It is considered as necessary step (referring to III chapters and sections).

The D level defined below being suitable for as B level (wherein, they are particularly simple).They are based on usually (non-) Receive in obvious analysis (although having a question) a series of it is assumed that such as: not considering time (that is, TS (X.i) .n) Itself is not with time change) and/or any embodiment of AC in inevitably limitation (therefore, so that the limitation is as skill A part of energy is invalid).Compared with following simple situation, they are not carried out to handle possible needs pairANCRelationship is more Complicated definition (referring to III chapters and sections):

■X.i).n antsX) if .n TS (X.i) .n) intersect with TS (X) .n).

■X.i).n not-antsX) if .n TS (X.i) .n) it is non-intersecting with TS (X) .n).

■X.i).n contradictsX) if .n X.i) .nantsX) .n,AndIf there is X.i) q- of .n CM, so that X.i) .n/mod (q-cM))antsX) .n, then following equation is set up: TS (X.i) .n/mod (q-cM)))=0.

These simple mathematical definitions can directly be extended to apply equally to TT.p and AC¹⁴⁾, both it is considered as The corresponding tupel of their attribute --- RS when AC⁺Element, that is, including the X.i from one or several TT.i) .n --- Pass through definition¹⁴⁾:

■AC antsIf TT.p TS (AC) intersects with TS (TT.p).

■AC not-antsIf TT.p TS (AC) and TS (TT.p) is non-intersecting.

■AC contradictsIf TT.p is for an X.i in AC) for .n, X.i) .nants X).nAnd AndIf there is X.i) q-cM of .n, so that X.i) .n/mod (q-cM))antsX) .n, then following equation is set up: TS (TT.i/ Mod (q-cM)))=0.

ANCThese mathematical definitions of the element of matrix may feel complicated at first sight: that is, this is only basic logic sum Sets theory.However, these formal definition accurately illustrate following meaning: anyone is intuitively and by Patent Law and precedent Between the prior art RS and its TT.p of determining PTRANCRelationship is associated.So far, seem inaccurate Ground¹⁴⁾And only use natural language description, that is, carried by its intricate property^5),15)。

Then, delay problem is clarified, whether the FSTP technology for analyzing PTR since pmg is effective is likely to be brought into danger Condition can make Q^plcs" devaluation " pmgp- --- example reason for this is that: current, pmgp and especially pmgp-, in number It is semantic not may be defined as plc as above on still, that is,ANCRelationship.It is describing for very innovative invention completely After there is no pmgp-, I.B.2 chapters and sections continue through pmgp be shown not be what fuzzy thing but on material clear quilt Construction excludes such worry.Finally, I.M chapters and sections, which depict, is strategically determined the influence of pmgp actually mathematically Become to can define and can even automate.

I.B.2The FSTP that the plcs fact of possible pmgp influence/pmgp- for handling to(for) PTR influences is supported

Continue the above content: the Graham/Deere about US Supreme law court is adjudicated, and a series of closer German BGH judgement²⁾In more clearly describe, for PTR,not-antsOr even its prior art and its TT.p it BetweencontradictsThe quantity Q of plcs relationship^plcsNecessary >=2, therefore, as (non-) for its TT.p relative to its RS The necessary of apparent property indicates^1),14).Therefore, Q^plcsIt has been named as " patent of the TT.p relative to its RS of PTR herein Semantic height in method " is also known as " plcs height ", wherein representative (Q^plcsThe value) with Q^plcsValue increase and increase.

However, necessary (non-) the apparent property expression of the TT.p of Patent Law is typically not enough to authorize by Patent Law It is protected.It is likely present that " actual effect of granted patent exclusive right, pmgp " are indispensably contemplated.Pmgp NPS table Show national society/Principles of Economy of the idea of support invention/TT.p " patent is exclusive to authorize " --- here it is assumed that known.Pass through Recognize pmgp, obtained Q^pmgpIt may become smaller, rather than be equal to or more than Q^plcs。

It is summarized in terms of the even other law reached of pmgp in I.M chapters and sections, and I.B.2 chapters and sections are only handled Q of the pmgp for PTR^plcsPossible influence.I.B.2.e describe FSTP expert system allow users to remove with Before any possible pmgp in the FSTP analysis of PTR influences related any probabilistic function, I.B.2.a is extremely I.B.2.b chapters and sections briefly describe 4 class a) to d) possible pmgp, although kings ' method is not shown (due to current in it And be not present).

One of I.B.2 chapters and sections the result is that: in the FSTP analysis of PTR, pmgp usually with one or several 1-cM mono- With appearance, therefore, any possible reason of influence of the pmgp for its plcs fact automatically can detect by FSTP, therefore Interactively can reduce or increase, this depend on its be for the inventor of TT.p it is negative be also advantageous (referring to III chapters and sections).This is indicated --- still studying the TT.p of PTR --- in its FSTP analysis, and true for its plcs is any Pmgp influences to be able to achieve the other property of the TT.p of user's desired effect by creating by FSTP user and handed over Manage (referring to I.A.6.i chapters and sections) to mutual formula.Therefore, FSTP expert system supports the patent that liquidates discussed to being difficult to think so far The degree of elephant, e.g., by utilizing copyright.In addition, negative effective possible applicable item can be covered up to extend RS Other document i so that¹⁴⁾Its influence is automatically traceable.

I.B.2 chapters and sections only discuss the possible pmgp influence for the technical secondary plcs fact of PTR.However, This indicates the influence while affecting technical secondary brass tacks --- so that additional proposal is out-of-date.

Following text " possible Q^plcsDevalue " it is only that the expression of the plcs fact of PTR is possibly as above reduced into pmgp^- Other method.

Last: hereinafter, " NPS " etc. (referring to I.M chapters and sections) are usually dull, therefore are omitted.

I.B.2.a)-possible Q for being generated since basic engineering/law of nature is true^plcsReduce --- without just True pmgp will be solved the problems, such as by the TT.p of PTR and/or will be by neither the related technical ability of TT.p is also not many institutes Known TT.p solves the problems, such as that true there may be engineering and/or law of nature is true, is disclosed for however, generating Plcs dependence between property/limitation of TT.p --- it is such as, being indicated with any of realization of TT.p or by aobvious Show that the purposes of TT.p makes some law of nature that at least one plcs dependence between property/limitation be forced to be disclosed for this TT.p。

A simple example for influencing this pmgp of the plcs fact of PTR is as follows: its TT.p discloses one kind and is used for It is drilled in the wall of old oak barrel to obtain the test equipment of investigation from their content, which is added in outside Hot --- passing through certain electronic technology ad-on feature of its awl --- is such as to ensure that the edge in hole is sterilized completely, and bucket Outer surface may organically and be jeopardously contaminated as follows: which is disappeared by insecure chemical substance Poison.Although not can know that the technical of the similar electricity of the awl of test equipment according to the test equipment of the content of old oak barrel Ad-on feature, however, can remain as follows to attack of the invention: its be not it is new, and awl electricity it is technical Ad-on feature is only cleverly: due to physical features, indicating that awl may be added in outside to any drilling of oak wall Heat, and due to chemical feature, the identical disinfection at the edge of device to hole may be implemented in this.

Here, such unessential common sense/engineering/law of nature opinion is a part of the plcs fact of determining PTR, Risk is not established due to pmgp --- it is absolutely not considered as pmgp therefore, that is, be not considered " correct Pmgp ".

I.B.2.b)-possible Q for being generated due to NPS^plcsReduce --- correct pmgp can to logically by The FSTP expert system for being modeled as NPS ontology provides the adjusting (precedent including national patent method and its Supreme Judicial Court) of NPS, because This, the adjusting of NPS can automatically control all judgements of FSTP analyzer under the supervision of FSTP user (referring to I.M chapters and sections). However, national court does not need to approve FSTP using their law/and/or their precedent (as with the NPS Ontology Modeling Precedent) method, therefore deviate from the modeled content of the NPS ontology or how in issue deviate from the NPS of modeling It has been applied to PTR.

Initial NPS ontology can only model minority and be simplified to describe the solution of the analysis of PTR.Its In, which can enable FSTP to automatically detect with any AC's of its TT.pANCIt is any between relationship The risk for the independence that pmgp is generated, that is, for its Q^plcsNPS-pmgp possible influence.

Simple example is the medical beverage of invention, and TT.p allows the general concept of the value of " applying temperature "^*Only compared with Small range, that is, " body temperature substantially applied ", this is and the concept^*TT.p authenticity set it is existing The limitation of related medical technology is compared, such as only " greater than 10 less than 50 DEG C ".Therefore, in terms of plcs, " concept^*'s The correct set of TT.p ", i.e. TS < TT.p concept^*>be its prior art authenticity set subset, that is, " TS<existing skill Art concept^*>and TS<TT.p concept^*> be separation ", that is, prior art concept^* not-antsTT.p concept^*.The prior art Range attribute must modify 1-cM (1-cM of its " using temperature " concept), and the N relationship quoted just now is changed into A relationship, Therefore, the TT.p limitation of " applying temperature " concept is helped to increase the Q of TT.p compared with the existing technology^plcs。

For the example, any NPS precedent has all been provided that the pmgp explains following common situations: like this Being by the range shorter of the prior art includes inessential property being indicated in the smaller range of TT.p rather than significant novelty, therefore For increasing the Q of TT.p compared with the existing technology^pmgpDo not contribute.However, if document p discloses TT.p together with basic excellent Point (occurs) as the result having a drink at a temperature of the application, this will not go out when bringing it to except this narrow range Existing, therefore, the above N relationship of TT.p can contribute to increase the Q of TT.p compared with the existing technology^pmgp--- in such case Under, 1-cM is independently of pmgp.

I.B.2.c)-possible Q for being generated due to related technology^plcsDevalue --- it is correct pmgp couples and PTR The technical ability of related proof carries out modeling and is sufficiently analogous to model the prior art, that is, is not technical problem, and is only matter Amount problem.Therefore, if its be incoherent (that is, non-TT.p realize) or non-proof or private, any NPS Think that technology (technology of the examiner of the technology and/or PTO of technical staff) is incoherent.

However, there is a problem due to following uncertain: related and proving and realization technical ability is actually No expected TT.p, that is, whether such explanation is only caused by language complexity (referring to I.C chapters and sections).

One example scenario of the problem is as follows: the non-technical source of some of information --- such as the communication original text number of some company According to library (referring to II.C.3 chapters and sections) --- it, can be with comprising for following new product in the marketing leaflet of the language of layman Some is solved the problems, such as in a manner of to look like acting on TT.p, wherein it is said that the solution being noted is based on Existing technical ability.The language of the layman it may be noted that being used to assert that the marketing document demonstrates by the layer of the attacker of TT.p It is expected that the presence of the related technical skills of the TT.p of PTR or at least so that it is apparent --- thus this can by law court Lai Shared, in addition, it also uses the language of the layman, and therefore refusal notices the TT.p of PTR, such as the related technology of document p (referring to I.D the and II.A.1.2 chapters and sections) that the language of personnel is technically discussed.

I.B.2.d)-due to lacking the disclosure that TT.p is realized and the possible Q that generates^plcsDevalue --- do not add Correct pmgp in the case where this phenomenon of pmgp, it is necessary to be distinguished from each other two very different aspects.

■ technical specialist it can be concluded thatIt is justifiableConclusion: the disclosure for claiming realization of the TT.p in document p is real It is only idea related with its property on border, without explaining how they can realize, although this is fundamental problem --- Thus, there is no uncertainties.

Otherwise, by the plcs disclosure of TT.p ■ is quantified as the TT.p's that " non-realization " is strongly dependent in document p The related technical quantization of the hypothesis reader of disclosure.Although the quantization must include the common related technology of TT.p Technical ability, however, the speciality of the presentation of these disclosures --- as understood, engineering philosophy required for TT.p (e.g., passes through telecommunications The invention speciality of the control international communication of the complicated system of network implementations and the invention speciality of screw) and/or novelty and/or Pass through TT.p solve technical field width --- can require: technology reader have the several years industrial career with Certain handicraft experiences.This can indicate the very different prophesy level of technical ability (referring to I.D to I.E, I.M and II.A.1.2 Chapters and sections) --- its can known to technical specialist, therefore, it is necessary to for determination by who be considered TT.p disclosure vacation Determine reader.

Since such pmgp seems only to allow to confirm that TT.p is selected with " Yes/No " that implementation is disclosed Item --- that is, not allowing above-mentioned " devaluation plcs independence " gradually --- does not herein temporarily further discuss it.

I.B.2.e)-for eliminating the FSTP support of pmgp influence during TT.p is created or is analyzed temporarily it is assumed that all 4 Class pmgp clearly and is completely defined --- it see below with I.M chapters and sections to obtain retouching in detail about the limitation State --- technically it is not important that: may lack be concerned about PTR pmgp independence, that is, detect and overcome TT.p Pmgp dependence any of of the matter/relationship/concept relative to its RS.It detects and overcomes it that can be postponed, Zhi Daoyi Through completing the determination by its FSTP analysis for the plcs fact of PTR, to be automatically carried out on a large scale^10),14), That is, being accidentally likely to require the support of FSTP user.Therefore, its all possible pmgp dependence is detected for the plcs fact Can execute automatically again, may be controlled completely by some suitable NLS ontology and/or by FSTP user interactively come It supervises (see below and I.M chapters and sections).Accordingly, it is possible to again by the NLS ontology to control and/or by the mutual of FSTP user To supervise, the plcs fact " can upgrade " and become the pmgp fact of PTR (by correctly linking to the former for effect Q^plcs- cM --- that is, linking to the former Q^plcsThe Q of-PS^plcsPath --- available pmgp).That is: automatically determining from PTR If the plcs fact obtain its pmgp fact be also possible to it is automatable --- there is agreement about its pmgp in NLS (referring to I.M chapters and sections).

The user interface of FSTP expert system can be based on possible NLS, with simple mode come to just disclosed inspection It looks into the plcs fact of PTR and is applied to it and modeled, wherein existing and having agreed to pmgp.However, the user interface It is also possible that FSTP user can intentionally/will tentatively claim the pmgp having agreed to that can be applied to PTR ignore and/ Or exaggerate to arbitrary extent.As its current situation, generally speaking, examiner/expert and be actually judicial question, Q^plcsThe path 1-cM of-PS is influenced by pmgp, which can gradually reduce (referring to I.M chapters and sections).However, for Solve that partially to provide the consequence of what hypothesis be what and/or right for what of some pmgp for legally can be applied to PTR In the training goal for the FSTP user for handling obtained situation, enable him to arbitrarily attempt a possibility that all.

If TT.p is still created, which is inventor provided by creating other feature to it to it He needs the guide for most preferably avoiding the measure of attack, to increase its plcs height and pmgp height as needed.

The comment of I.B.2 chapters and sections may be interested: actual PTR (the especially recent years analyzed so far Since USA the Supreme Judicial Court and Germany the Supreme Judicial Court all precedents for (non-) apparent sex determination) show Following plcs is true, cannot be quantified as pmgp dependence (pmgp independence) at once.As disclosed in this, all these Invention is very simple for complicating FSTP analysis.For ' the 884 relative complex PTR that are analyzed in II chapters and sections and Speech, this especially sets up, and supports following case: Cisco vs.Teles (BGH, X.Panel^1),2),3),Germany)yiji Teles vs.Cisco(Distr.Court of Delaware,24.07.2010,US).In both cases, it all sets up as follows: ' the 884 plcs fact=884 pmgp are true, indicate Q^pmgpBig value --- this is currently still by two verdicts of court institutes Ignore.

I.CAttribute D/B-X related for determination) .n and their concept C/B-C.k comment

It returns to before the description above with respect to determination/definition PTR plcs fact and the pmgp fact, determine its TT.p has Close D attribute/B attribute X) .n and D concept/B concept C.k processing needs to illustrate.

In PTR, any related disclosure/properties/attributes X) .n (referring to I.A.5 chapters and sections), (1) is in document p Any disclosure in assume its certain premises of support, that is, the disclosure is based on some basic table involved in it Its essence can be (here, still keeping away system in meaning --- as the D/B-X) D concept involved in .n/B concept provide --- Exempt to solve the problems, such as D level/B level)

■ is alternatively, " technical " is also known as " field is specific ", such as disclosure: " if the calling of data transferring technique Being delayed over 0.5 second between person and callee, then it is suitable for the Internet telephony ".Here, basic frame of reference is again Claim D concept/B concept provided by related clear telecommunication technology technical ability, it is assumed that it is such delay be it is measurable and It must be not above in call 0.5 second.

■ is alternatively, " on non-technical "/" non-field is specific ", such as disclosure: " cost savings the Internet telephony It is unsuitable for conveying and congratulates, because its emotion that may injure callee, and therefore may influence the fame of caller ".? This, basic frame of reference is also known as D concept/B concept and is not provided by technical skills, by well known social common sense Lai It provides.

Although two examples above will not bring suspection, however, in other cases, some disclosure/property will be supported Matter/attribute premise is also known as D concept/B concept and is quantified as technology or non-technical --- and correspondingly quantifying to the latter can It can be critically important.In order to explain, the importance of the technology premise of the TT.p discussed can be entrusted to them by the national Supreme Judicial Court Technical specialist's (as executed recently in Germany) for approving of reliable, government or entrust to their inferior court (e.g., US and present age Germany).That is, the judgement of the Supreme Judicial Court itself can be only to legal issue and only to the skill of their proof The technical issues of art ability, makes decision.

If law court is even without the term for recognizing disclosure --- anywhere use to colloquial style Term --- wherein have accurate art-recognized meanings: its then colloquial style term is explained, that is, nonlegally to art Language explains, then the problem becomes difficult to handle.

(2) must not be optional in TT.p --- therefore, being ignored again, (it is inessential for taking into account selection , referring to III chapters and sections).

(3) another X ' of TT.p cannot must be depended on) .n ', that is, it must independent (independently of plcs) (ginseng in PTR See I.A.5 chapters and sections).

This, which has shown that, determines all related D.B-X for PTR by FSTP user) .n and their basic D it is general Thought/B concept can be almost unessential activity¹⁴⁾--- however, therefore FSTP must often depend upon their own, because he must Technical ability related with PTR (referring to I.D to I.E chapters and sections, more explanations can be obtained) must be utilized.

However: although can be used in executing the natural language document of determining PTR currently without usual available user's manual Interior is all based on the D attribute X in relation to technical skills) activity of .n --- when starting to explain patent --- is however, appropriate DSNL (the specific natural language in=field) can support to execute the task.

Firstly, for the vital side note of current such field details: any NPS has passed through some classification System divides the whole fields for meeting Patent Law, which determines the various technical fields of application.This trial mentions For the big field some general introduction, also, the current extraordinary obsolescence of orientation in the big field, misapplied with it is mixed.Therefore, Desired character with any of the above-described advanced DSNL is almost without relationship.Therefore, FSTP may be completely independent of the trial to grasp Make, although it also can be provided in matched generally well-known term between the categorizing system and the PTR for passing through its analysis.

In terms of this, it is often more important that: for PTR, in the natural language suitably limited is presented, FSTP expert System has following optional ability: automatically by the unofficial attribute transformation of PTR at formal attribute and to semi-automatically retouch State plcs (no) correlation and plcs dependence (independence) X of attribute) .n.Referring to:

D level/B level in ■ " ' 884 PTR problem ", technical report #1, FSTP engineering, and

■ " the formalized aspect of the independent true progress to patent ", in the preparation carried out by FSTP engineering.

These articles discuss will be in the informal disclosure of technical ability being described in detail based on correct natural language and hint Appearance/properties/attributes --- that is, with correct natural language description and dependent on reader for known to related technical ability (and described with limited natural language ACE (trial of control English), it still is based on related technical ability) it is informal basic True disclosure/properties/attributes --- translate into formal D attribute/B attribute X) .n/X.i) .n and their possibility D concept/B concept, that is, the utterly equivalent basic formal fact in logic enables FSTP to automatically determine Between TT.i and TT.pantsRelationship/not-antsRelationship (/contradictsRelationship) (referring to I.B.1 chapters and sections).If needed These ACE attributes are automatically translated into formal X.) .n/X..i) .n, then they it is only possible with it is current equally close to they The correct natural language disclosure of PTR.If FSTP user or FSTP request any problem at any time, this is automatic Translation can enable FSTP automatically determine that the above-mentioned D-plcs fact/B-plcs is true and possible D-pmgp it is true/ The B-pmpg fact (at least most of) --- therefore interactively cooperate with FSTP user.It is this to need even in single PTR In analysis also inevitably, these concepts are controversial or cannot change in D level/B level --- Especially when beginning setting up D level/B level.

I.D " Layman level "/" school classes level "/use between " technical staff's level " and D level/B level is appointed The relationship what language indicates

The above chapters and sections depict theirs for disclosure:

■ can be by converting them due to inexactness caused by their " informal natural language use " Reduce at " formal natural language use " and they

■ caused by being limited to the term independently of PTR/express the meaning due to lacking for be carrying out actual PTR points The concern of analysis can be improved by the way that they are transformed into formal B level presentation from formal D level presentation, wherein " PTR Analyze specific term/express the meaning " it is available,

Wherein, two kinds of transformation are very independent each other --- and all such considerations are all based on related technical ability.

Particularly, subsequent transformation requires other clarification, as having been described in I.C. (1) chapters and sections: although only as follows Problem has been solved: hint is term technology disclosure or non-technical disclosure, and I.D chapters and sections discuss I.A.4 extremely I.A.5 neutralize the D in the patent specification above emphasized present level disclosure and B present level disclosure it Between legally equivalent far-reaching difference of expressing the meaning --- that is, D level express the meaning analyzed as PTR it is unspecific but fuzzy, And B level expresses the meaning and discusses in complete set and analyze discussed PTR problem and more sharp, all these presentations are all based on technical ability.

Any explanation of the clear needs and FSTP are all not related, but belong to the specific basis of patent explanation. These reaffirm herein, because patent court's case is sometimes

■ due to the fact that and it is chaotic: these express the meaning on D difference/B difference can it is any not it is unessential specially Force substantially different meaning in benefit and be also known as the expressing the meaning (referring to the final stage and II.A.1.2 chapters and sections of I.D chapters and sections) of term,

■ particularly, if wherein third expresses the meaning level is presented --- in D level or in B level --- it is processed.

Correctly understanding/solve this, absolutely the patent interpretation problems on basis are unrelated with FSTP is used for PTR analysis, but It is, firstly, unrelated with the TT.p and its TT.i of PTR is correctly grasped --- in description about the skill between TT.p and the prior art Before the fact that art is distinguished.

This problem is due to the fact that different in the presence of any (true/limited) natural language intrinsic 3 kinds Term/express the meaning " the related professionalism of multiple levels " --- being enumerated by 3 subsequent point sentences --- wherein, NPS^1),2)It is assumed that Any disclosure is all located at the level of technical staff: the language

■ " layman's " level it is related it is professional (that is, none because term express the meaning be by common dictionary such as Webster is provided),

■ " technical staff's " level it is related professional (that is, all, because expressing the meaning for term is existed by technical staff Used document provides when carrying out their routine work, if telecommunication technology is sent out by the related common recognition policy-making body of UN The international standard of cloth, such as ISO and/or ITU-T and/or IEC and/or IEEE and/or IETF and/or their country member/group Knit/..., wherein these technical standards are completely the same in some cases and supplement each other in other cases, but in country Uniquely is understood in range by related telecommunication technology personnel) --- be not required to it is however emphasized that: in any language, technical staff's level In relation to professionalism must cannot be mixed with the language level of (unwanted herein) technical specialist, as it is assumed that expert understanding and The related professionalism of various all such levels in relation to technical staff can be evaluated --- and

The related professionalism of ■ " school classes " level, the author of textbook attempt to select their reader/student --- Related term and the initial layman to express the meaning are understood by them --- and lead/instruct them closer to related skill It the term of art personnel and expresses the meaning, e.g., term in telecommunication technology textbook in the related textbook of Stallings and expresses the meaning (e.g., " ISDN and Broadband ISDN with frame delay and ATM ").That is: in any such textbook level, it is necessary to term/express the meaning occur Difference --- it is continually clarified in detail in order to simple, if be fully solved, because in this level, they are usually It is considered less subtle.

According to the precedent of the Supreme Judicial Court in any NPS, the professional level of natural language used in patent be with One of technical ability in the related field the TT.p of patent (e.g., in USA, on June 20th, 2010 case in Telcordia and Cisco Confirm again by CAFC in part and by Supreme Courts Bilski judgement, such as referred to above).Therefore, work as explanation When the text of patent specification and/or claim,It is necessaryExpressing the meaning for the language level of the technical staff of term is selected, otherwise It is likely to occur fallacy --- as shown in II.A.1.2 chapters and sections.

That is: the precedent --- emphasize it is understood that patent explain in difference and in the language for wherein using technical staff Speech --- is supported in patent explanation using the duty of the level --- that is, natural language level of layman --- of their own sometimes The method institutes of natural language that patent is released in industry neutralizing is ignored, and law court may institute's sound for " natural language in relation to technical staff " The artificial thing claimed feels uncomfortable in this way, therefore, if it simply has ignored the legal problem --- it does not have even Have and is distinctly claimed: some term of the natural language of the patent/expressing the meaning, there is no technical things, therefore, it is not required to Technical skills are wanted to determine/the meaning of expressing the meaning of the term (referring to I.C (1) chapters and sections).Therefore, natural language of the same court in the patent The professional level of the layman of speech explains claim/specification of the patent, or at most the natural language certain The professional level of a textbook explains claim/specification of the patent.Itself in addition, continue in this way sometimes into Row, or even oppose the affidavit of the technical specialist of the proof of their own, law court is requested and term by inquiring to him He related technology fact state of expressing the meaning based on technical ability --- this is expressed the meaning therefore is actually based on related technical ability and therefore Clearly illustrate the opposite view for the view that the layman of law court implements these technologies (referring to II.A.1.2 chapters and sections).

In telecommunication technology, exist with the crowd of the artificial thing claimed that the natural language in relation to technical staff indicates Well known example: such as, notional D level term of the natural language of patent

■“Connection" B level on the expressing the meaning of technical staff²⁰⁾On be "Data transmit association... " (ISO 7498-1, 5.3.1.2 chapters and sections, as IEC/IEEE/ITU-T/US-GSA, --- the standardization giant of telecommunication technology --- is all using identical ISO-OSI reference model document, and therefore use the identical definition based on technical ability of the meaning of term " connection ").

■“Communication connection" be for technicians ISO/ ... "Using connection" (about the personnel, " phone is exhaled Cry " in application, " communication connection " is defined as its " application connection "),

■“Call" or "Internet telephone cell" B level on the expressing the meaning of technical staff²⁰⁾On be defined as “Calling including all participants in meeting<may be only two participants>... " (IETF RFC 2543, abstract and 1.3 Chapters and sections, wherein 1988 definition of 2543 callings have reaffirmed above earlier the 7498 of the connection kept in 1996 Definition --- indicate that then calling there is once defining its participant, that is, be actually established in its technical understanding When time point before (its " call setup " during occur)).

Although layman may consider these meanings of term " connection "/" communication connection "/" calling " to create unnecessarily Wide expresses the meaning, and the technical discussion that international consensus cited above establishes many years in ontology is verified: these terms these Express the meaning indicate technical staff in telecommunications it is desirable that.And in fact, " connection "/" communication connection "/" calling " is such Expressing the meaning will not be putd question to by the technical staff in telecommunication technology field --- in " being initialized to it "/" creating it "/" foundation Its " before be first begin to the lower layer of existing connection/calling and express the meaning²⁰⁾Especially will not.

This demonstrate that: according to I.A.4 to I.E chapters and sections, for the patent of some subject fields, for it is total from it/without fixed Shape D level term/express the meaning --- as concentrate discuss discussed PTR analysis --- to obtain its B level term/express the meaning and Speech, related technical skills and its term/express the meaning are utterly independent²⁰⁾.Pay special attention to, discussion is concentrated actually to be considered PTR analysis these B level terms/express the meaning --- herein for telecommunication technology field technical ability (referring to II chapters and sections) --- make Them are obtained impliedly to disclose¹⁾The entire group of " outside patent " B attribute and B concept, as illustrated by above 3 points sentence.

If about patent/meaning of claim and/or law court's case of range in, law court's refusal, which uses, " to be had Close the natural language of technical staff " term/express the meaning, then law court be likely to determine the patent/meaning of claim and/or Range differ markedly from the inventor by patent by means of use the patent/the related technology layer of the natural language of claim Grade is come its meaning/translation for describing.Therefore, the impressive example of final disaster is following case: German Cisco Vs.Teles, BGH, X.Panel, 15.04.2010 and/or, Teles vs.Cisco, the Distr.Court of of USA Delaware, 24.07.2010, as II.A.1.2 chapters and sections are explained in detail.

I.EPTR problem is presented and carries out formalized and transformation other reason

Firstly, carrying out repeated transformation and formalized about the presentation to PTR, however it remains theory of knowledge reason in addition: that is, Want to determine and obtain for the PTR problem --- i.e. its TT.p is indicated relative to (non-) apparent property of its RS --- Ratio before well known more opinions.This desirably has due to similar obtained by as in many natural sciences Beneficial phenomenon: it is proved repeatedly, to problem analyze can by its is formalized and be transformed into the presentation suitable for the analysis come It is abundant.I.E chapters and sections, which are explained, analyzes the related expectation with the FSTP of PTR, such as (such as I.A.5 chapters and sections) claimed above.

Obtaining the apparent property of such (non-) for PTR indicates the new opinion of problem --- by the way that (technology will be used Personnel's) simple natural language present indicate it is all may relevant PTR disclosures be transformed into logic it is equivalent still More accurate and formal meaning (as technical staff is confirmed) and its B level even is transformed into from the presentation in its D level On presentation --- in the range of Patent Law be absolutely new.As mentioned: in natural science and engineering, they Similar coordinate system transformation is also known as presented transformation and is practiced and obtained in addition ever since (referring to I.A.5.x chapters and sections) Basic opinion, e.g.,

■ is in many celestial mechanics problems: being presented by original the earth's core Euclidean coordinate system from them (Ptolemaic ... pre Brahe et al.) arrives solar core Euclidean coordinate system (Kopernikus, Galileo, Kepler Et al.), to non-Euclidean the theory of relativity coordinate system present (Einstein et al.) many transformation,

■ is in many electricity theoretical questions: by the way that (pre is presented in their original " real number/function ") become It changes " plural number/function " into and (post is presented),

■ is in many elementary particle physics problems: by the way that (such as Bohr is presented in their original " determination " People) be transformed into " probability " present (Planck, Heisenberg, Hilbert et al.),

■ is in many signaling problems: the Fourier transformation or DCT change between " frequency " presentation being presented by " space " It changes.

In addition, here, basic advantage be derived from the presentation of (non-) of PTR apparent property problem is original non-from its Formal simple natural language, which discloses ,/description/presents and is transformed into equivalent formal simple natural language D in its theory of knowledge Level is presented, formal " extension " natural language B level reciprocity in its theory of knowledge is presented, wherein all presentations are all false Fixed: their term/express the meaning by technical staff use/understands (referring to I.D chapters and sections).6 examples are:

1.) most important and all: the precedent about PTR problem of the Supreme Judicial Court^1),2)It can be formalized, because this A little influences of the precedent for technology fact of PTR problem, by the influence of its FSTP analysis determination --- indicate its TT.p relative to The apparent property of (non-) of its prior art RS --- correspond the conjunction in AC relative to the formal attribute of its prior art RS Suitable 1-cM¹⁴⁾, wherein

2.) its D level attributes is concentrated and is discussed below hypothesis: the informal public affairs of PTR correctly and are accurately presented in they Content is opened, because related those of ordinary skill has grasped " viewpoint " of the TT.p of PTR,

3.) its B level attributes concentration is discussed below hypothesis: the disclosure of which by related technical staff correctly and accurately It takes in, it is (true for Graham to obtain with the property of its TT.i TT.p distinguished to it dependably to determine Improved determination and explanation),

4.) it is required: these B level attributes/concepts allow to comment on these for supporting them to be based on more accurately more can be only Vertical true 1-cM^10),14)Idea plcs independence and pmgp independence,

5.) that is, since they pass through the repeatedly FSTP analysis acquirement by these precedents applied to PTR absolutely essentially --- wherein, application as one can be considered as indicating one " plcs unit " (obeying its plcs independence) --- simultaneously And therefore, realization substantially improves into the expression of its traditional technical secondary brass tacks technical secondary The expression of the plcs fact and the pmgp fact, and " prefinal/ is unexamined " fact is actually modified to (referring to I.M chapter Section).

6.) it wherein, executes all these transformation now substantially to be supported by FSTP expert system, in practice for most It is automatable for PTR^10),14)(referring to I.M chapters and sections).

Excessively simplify very much through these achievable basic advantages of these coordinate transforms of PTR problem, the former can be with Likened by using " tachymetric measuring instrument " to describe again (referring to the ending of I.A chapters and sections).According to Known to Webster dictionary: the tachymetric measuring instrument at some point enables its user to determine the system visible It anticipates other height relative to the point, such as crosses the mountain top of all these points.In the FSTP analysis of PTR, it can be showed There is technology RS⁺Analogon of the combined shell as all these various accessibility points.Therefore, FSTP analyzer makes it User can pass through Q^pmgpValue determine its TT.p relative to the RS⁺Innovation height (and it is even better, also pass through Q^pmgp- PS determines the RS from the PTR⁺The different point of possibility to its TT.p all shortest paths).The PTR of the FSTP is analyzed In various presentation levels in traditional tachymetric measuring instrument correspond to its use to different lens, gradually Amplify the analysis of true to plcs and the pmgp fact the feasibility, this has been continuously improved from RS^+freeTo TT.p " path is set It sets "¹⁴⁾(referring to I.M chapters and sections).

It is final: by the PTR analysis of the FSTP realized with up conversion by means of coming from IT science especially from IT system The basic and long known opinion of two of design, it may be assumed that

■ is in order to determine meaning --- that is, the understanding it --- of text (sentence) of claim its plcs/ " association base " (=technical ability) of pmgp is essential, because it determines the meaning of the sentence^1),2).In other words: it is For all linguist, language translation technician, knowledge engineer ... known decades: determine some well known syntax Sentence --- such as sentence (e.g., English glossary and grammer) of the correct English claim of English syntax --- meaning (solution Release) unique method be to obtain the meaning from the association base in association base/actual effect semantically of the sentence.Right It is required that legally specified association base be its patent specification/attached drawing (as related technical staff understands).

Analysis of the ■ for PTR, property must be described as attribute as formal as possible, wherein the transformation must be permitted Perhaps the interactive inspection of various highly redundancies.Only meet the requirement by FSTP expert system to make it possible to for reasonable Inquiry all set --- carrying out the PTR of FSTP analysis technology the fact between any one company having a question Knot --- correctly and all answers are determined entirely by, to be stored in the WS of PTR analysis, and as needed They are immediately presented.If its TT.p is located at abstract/non-visual/specificity of high-level, e.g., it is integrated with and largely claims The size of independent attribute, the then set and its all answers for inquiring is very big, these attributes with it is following related: 1.) its technology Feature, 2.) generation/realize it, 3.) use it to service as the competition with POTS by market, 4.) it is integrated into company / networked environment of user in, 5.) its cost, 6.) its robustness ....

I.FThe analysis for being integrated into PTR of the FSTP of the precedent of other research vs. Supreme Judicial Courts

I.F chapters and sections, which are outlined, to be created " precedent of the Supreme Judicial Court merges " for analyzing related FSTP with the apparent property of PTR Newly several decision sex differernces between other " precedent of the non-Supreme Judicial Court merges " of apparent property research.It illustrates: No one of these other academic researches even only identify the needs for the thing similar with FSTP novelty, without referring to One of which with actually disclosed any similar thing --- it can be obtained turning also now to I.G chapters and sections other Related research.No one of all these effort are aimed at based on epistemological real-time patent expert system, and I.A is extremely FSTP expert system disclosed in I.M chapters and sections is formally in this way.Referring to such as:

■“Recherche und Prüfung einer Erfindung auf", H.Beyer, GRUR 1986。

■ " Psychologists ' Views on Nonobviousness-Are They Obvious? ", J.Davidson and N.Greenberg, 2008.

■ " The Inducement Standard of Patentability ", M, Abramowicz and J.D.Duffy, 2010.

FSTP analysis solves the problems, such as PTR using different methods, and the fuzzy dark of the Supreme Judicial Court is described in detail Show and " since the prior art, reaches indispensable independent required for TT.p¹⁰⁾The quantity q >=0 " of idea.Therefore, it creates Expressing the meaning for the novelty " for counting the q-cM of such idea " is built, which results in the " technical secondary of novelty Basis// creativeness fact semantically " --- including " TT.p compared with the existing technology RS substantially/semantically/ The novelty of creative height q >=0 " is expressed the meaning and " Q^Basic/Q^Semantically/Q^pmgpThe novelty of set of paths " is expressed the meaning --- its (non-) the apparent property of being somebody's turn to do for providing the mode for convictively quantifying and limiting indicates (referring to I.A to I.E chapters and sections).

That is: any other scientific none trial of effort solves the problems, such as PTR, for it, can be and creates very much Therefore the idea of property can become to know repeatedly by the table of " creative idea " (also known as " independently of the idea of pmgp ") Meaning is applied to a possibility that determining " the technical secondary innovative fact " of PTR, so that its:

■Q^pmgp=0/ > 0 indicates apparent property/unobviousness of the TT.p relative to its RS, wherein this " ability " indicated is with Q^pmgpValue increase and increase, and

■Q^pmgpSet of paths, which is directed to, comes from RS⁺Any Q^pmgp- AC has determined all Q^pmgpTotal set of-cM, so that The TT.p is found since its prior art RS --- that is, making not from RS⁺Reach other approach of TT.p.

Therefore, the need of the information for PTR is presented of B level of the none of which for any PTR with its FSTP It wants or existing ignorant (referring to I.A.5 chapters and sections), indispensably needs for so that the fact is justifiable^{1), 2)}。

I.G Use of the FSTP technology for ontology, knowledge engineering research

In addition to other scientific researches for being explained in I.F chapters and sections and " the FSTP technology " explained in I.A into I.E chapters and sections it Between difference --- be characterized in that the innovative epistemological property of FSTP expert system, that is, be in the 1. of knowledge transformation The heart --- except, which grinds with according to the understanding of knowledge engineering come the science for the other types for handling patent problem There is also basic differences between studying carefully.That is, FSTP technology, which aims to solve the problem that, is determining the specific semantic fact/wound in Document Knowledge The epistemological problem occurred when the fact that the property made, and these other new technologies of learned research are indifferent to semanteme/actual effect Property and handle the idea for speculating the syntax driving for the knowledge for helping management Ontology Modeling, if it also concentrates discussion patent Subject fields.

It is as follows from the ontology domain and to representative investigation/article of the management of its knowledge:

■ US Patent 5,694,523, Wical, 1995:Oracle Corp show the hair that such patent generates Bright patentability,

■ Patent Application US 2008/0021700 A1, Moitra, 2006:Lockheed Martin Corp.,

■“A...Platform for Invention Based on Ontology and Patent Document Analysis ", V.W.Soo, 2005:9^thICCSCWD,

■ " Automatic Patent Document Summarization... ", A.J.C.Trappey, 2009:J Syst Sci Syst Eng。

This all 4 investigation/article indicates: solving the problems, such as the unobviousness addressable/available in real time of PTR Anywhere the theory of knowledge method of FSTP is not all accessible even.No one of these ontology research activities can only It considers and " makes it possible to use acquainted FSTP expert system, institute related with the unobviousness problem of PTR in real time The problem of concrete type that system method " occurs --- wherein, this knowledge include it is true for PTR and provide calculably and Internationalization ground solve the problems, such as opinion in all theory of knowledgies of all specific kind of contexts of support needed for this and Opinion in these theory of knowledgies and FSTP analyzer are from the relationship between these contexts for wherein obtaining them --- without Refer to the actual technical solution for considering the problem, as disclosed in I chapters and sections " FSTP expert system " provides 's.

Although the basic distinction explained above between other research functions of knowing and the function of FSTP expert system, Result from ontology research is related with the certain practical problems also generated in FSTP expert system, passes through knowledge transformation 2. the function at center is handled.The state of ontology research enables it to be enough in by carrying out autotext to all related documents It analyzes to recognize the related disclosure of PTR and all contexts.That is: the supporting point of " ontology " is: it makes it possible to It is enough to provide global context to FSTP as needed, it is such as literary by a large amount of possible/prior art claimed of display automatically It offers to obtain informal brass tacks.This reliably allows to exclude most of association therein from patent case, with can By ground comment in such document of maintenance, any informal brass tacks is deleted and is correctly examined Consider.So far, which can be forms for a long time so that its can actually make FSTP expert system now need by Its user is out-of-date (referring to I.M chapters and sections) come the largely input provided.

Fig. 4 a to Fig. 4 j basically illustrates the various aspects that ontology is used by FSTP expert system.

Fig. 4 a expectation show: FSTP --- whenever using its creation/formation/analysis/implementation/management/... discussed When TT.p and its PTR --- it semi-automatically for good and all supports to consider for the movable shadow by especially following three context It rings: current global " state's laws system, and NLS " context (the precedent ontology including their Supreme Judicial Court, including it is based on Law), it is current global " subject fields of patentability, SAOP " context (including according to fig. 2 a to Fig. 2 e and Fig. 3 a to scheming The model of each theme of 3b tissue, including their ontology) and TT.p specific " TT.p management processing, TT.p- ADMIN " context (including the specific document of all TT.p, including it is examined and lawsuit History noumenon and all relevant texts Offer) --- it is each established using junior's ontology domain " ontology domain, OD ", named as shown in fig. 4 a /can define.That is: Can be used in combination in one or several NLS and SAOP contexts the knowledge transformation in any field TT.p 1. centers and 2. any function (see below) of the FSTP expert system at center, unless certain management function/safety of FSTP expert system Function imposes certain limitation.

Context ontology, which is rendered as individual entity, should not be misinterpreted as limiting their realization structure: their skill Art, which implements --- it is apparent that being Database Systems or its subsystem ---, can greatly be folded each other (that is, being implemented as one Individual database) or can be divided into even smaller functional entity, wherein each entity can only include certain seed type Ontology as being included in its " maternal body ", and can be implemented as any one individual database therein.This Outside, as illustrated in figure 1 c, the functional entity i.e. aggregation of their " database engine " or decomposition do not imply that any specific object The realization or distributed realization of centralization in reason.

Initially, the global context ontology of FSTP expert system may be incomplete, and can be in the week of several years It is gradually established in phase.Know with the specific PTR for carrying out FSTP analysis at its beginning together with associated all contexts In contrast knowledge is fully inputted in several days in its each TT.p-ADMIN ontology by its user.Under any circumstance, FSTP is real Applying can make its user implement available all knowledge according to his FSTP that needs to browse.As shown in Figure 1, all these activities It can use the various technological know-hows of FSTP that function is presented.

Current global context ontology provide for the PTR discussed the innovative height problem defined in this way really It is fixed.As shown in Fig. 5 a to Fig. 5 b, FSTP in the conversion process of true Screening Treatment more than obtaining in these determinations by solving The epistemological result and actual result released solves the problems, such as this, to determine the function of these processing and exercise these functions The step of sequence (referring to I.J chapters and sections).

There is no static service ratings between ontology.However, FSTP's is any using can be according to their enforcement Sequence stacks them, to imply the representing dynamic level of pixel between them.Such as: in initiation and such as specific TT.p-ADMIN The related work of specific functional module after, FSTP user can select at least one NLS therein and at least one If a SAOP module it is --- significant --- its therefore can control user execute the TT.p-ADMIN module at least one At least one of function is tightly in enforcement later or occurring later on (b to 4d) referring to fig. 4.In addition, applying --- have at once Or delay or selective (in any way) effect --- in some TT.p-ADMIN function or some SAOP function (e to 4f) referring to fig. 4, alternatively, when he is according to some new environmentally friendly TT.p-ADMIN function or some new environmentally friendly NLS before The needs of function start to initiate some SAOP module such as to modify one of them " environmentally friendly TT model " wherein when (referring to fig. 4 g), Corresponding situation he be first begin to initiate NLS module such as to update one of them " environmentally friendly law " wherein when also set up.

For the every other enforcement sequence executed by FSTP user, corresponding situation is also set up.I.J chapters and sections also discuss Such example for exercising sequence.User can at any time between arbitrary context arbitrarily switching and according to need To work them, this is supported by " activity mark " ontology and " obtained state " ontology, to keep he be informed that with The related information of current total state of the analysis of PTR and its how to obtain --- again by using, FSTP's is specific Suitable presentation function of the ground designed for " the tracking report " of their type.

One of purpose of the general introduction of the function to FSTP TT.p at the ending of I.G chapters and sections is to show: FSTP expert System itself is designed/is defined as " finity state machine ".This is indicated: it is by the implementation of HW/SW system for IT system It is understandable for the technical staff of design aspect.

I.H Two centers of FSTP expert system and its knowledge transformation

Therefore, I chapters and sections it is intermediate summarize it can be pointed out that: FSTP expert system include two very different finite states from Dynamic device is also known as the machine that processor is also known as knowledge transformation function, both height can alternately work each other: that is, its

■ " PTR to it is basic/semantically/the creative fact " knowledge transformation machine.This isIt is epistemologicalKnowledge becomes 1. centers for the FSTP expert system changed (referring to Fig. 1 d).It mainly passes through I.A and discloses to I.G chapters and sections, and passes through entire II Chapters and sections are explained, and are described in detail by a part of I.M chapters and sections, and,

■ " PTR and its basic/semantically/creative true to all first true context details, instead " knowledge transformation machine.This isIt is actual2. centers of the FSTP expert system of knowledge transformation (referring to Fig. 1 d).It is main It is disclosed by I.J to I.M chapters and sections.

Therefore, FSTP is unique " patent // creative activity expert system ", is,

■ usually and immediately (in real time) can --- after having analyzed the creative activity of PTR ---

■ for FSTP user determine patent/the technical secondary basis of creative activity/semantically/wound The fact that the property made, and

■ associated every other information (no matter from where, in the WS of PTR, the former can it is any up and down Obtain in text and due to any and at any time and by anyone, but also save the information), and

Institute's correlate between information as ■.

For this purpose, constituting all these functions on the basis of FSTP --- the function at two center and its presentation and WS pipe Reason function --- indispensably require and height intersection can be performed so that FSTP can simply and efficiently manage with The related all knowledge of PTR problem.

Therefore, FSTP expert system is unique, because so far, following two situation is all invalid:

(but being limited) inside with the usual complexity of relationship and the technology fact therebetween of ■ PTR/ creative activity The adjusting of the related theory of knowledge knowledge of network and the network realized by many external contexts --- it is known

■ be used for for PTR/ creative activity generate and for rendering all these extremely new technologies and be used for All such (including original available) knowledge are related all possible (but being only limitedly many actually required) Its technology instrument is used in the real-time answering system of problem.

Fig. 1 d and its preceding brief description should not be misinterpreted as limitation control stream be performed simultaneously PTR analysis (although Its double-head arrow sequence indicates the such control stream frequently occurred): however, it illustrates know what is saved by FSTP center system Know the two function centers converted and presentation and WS management function is grouped/assembles the realization of FSTP expert system functionally One of many embodiments of relevant module --- this is described in detail in I.J chapters and sections.

I.J The possible Technical Architecture of the center system of FSTP

The disclosure of I.G to I.H chapters and sections is described in detail, I.J chapters and sections explain the center system of FSTP (then also referred to as It is specifically provided by its technical pattern and module to FSTP user for the embodiment of the realization FSTP TT.p of " FSTP ") Its actual and theory of knowledge on function and these functions in PTR analysis to which solve which class problems comprising show Out:

■ why obtain these solutions require for any PTR analysis establish " working set, WS ", also, Wherein establish " inside access database, IADB " to its " raw data base, RDB " (and what these databases are), and

■ was indispensably needed support and using the predetermined of the FSTP specific pre-existing HW/SW system being based on Complicated interface entire scope, as according to the requirement determination to be satisfied when solving the problems, such as FSTP user.That is: its It also shows, some of which is integrated into FSTP center system, and some is not had (specifically external used in it Database) --- its interface interacts with each other, and interacts with the working set of IADB and RDB, and be with presenting It unites (RS) and the interaction of WS management function is (referring to such as Fig. 1 b to 1e, 4b to 4j and 5a to 5b).

Very in general, solve the problems, such as PTR analysis in FSTP user and it is related with these problems in real time In answer problem use its result --- such as, in court's trial or auditor meet in or TT.p inventor or attacker With his (they) patent attorney or with to license/purchase TT.p qualified products or open debate ... related with TT.p sense In the meet of the possible client of interest --- it may require repeatedly

■ obtains large-scale information from wherein included all ontologies and is loaded into a part therein In WS,

■ promptly screens WS's for the informal true or formal fact of certain specific category in measurement Information,

Such informal true or formal fact is transformed into other informal true or formal by ■ The fact,

■ verifies the feasibility of the fact to user, and is directed at once general purposes, fully but appropriate Ground proves these verifications,

■ automatically and/or interactively explains all the facts and/or both is integrated into following WS,

Zero information and/or

Zero document in addition generated and/or prove document and/or

Zero ontology

It is may being prompted by FSTP and/or guidance as automatically and/or interactively determined,

■ redundantly verifies the feasibility of such symbol to user, and is directed at once general purposes, fully but It is suitably to prove these verifications,

■ redundantly verifies the integrality of such symbol to user, and is directed at once general purposes, suitably demonstrate,proves Why bright other/other symbols are/is extra/mistake.

Wherein, all these functions can be met with by the user of FSTP expert system in the auditor of court's trial/either or Meet ... some months before (seeing above)/exercise in a few weeks/several days --- meanwhile, it is established by using external resource The presentation appropriate of the WS of the PTR and such information, and therefore do not need real-time working --- however, it is desirable to according to The request of family inquiry " increased information " by as is delivered to FSTP user can also be in response to his actual for it Specific inquiry and occur at any time, wherein it is expected such inquire or suggest they can automatically or Interactively occur or is controlled by tracking and the information-related communication process of WS by FSTP.Specifically, all these Real-time function can automatically be exercised by FSTP expert system or be travelled by its user, for training and verifying his pair In the dexterity of knowledge related with the PTR of various merits.

Although current such " profile of user demand " is considered for the expert system of most of complexity Futurology, however, here, formal description (referring to I.A chapters and sections) for the performance of the TTs of PTR and to be analyzed in FSTP In the limited context of limited quantity that takes in limit the number reasonably inquired related with to become limited PTR Amount --- although these limited set reasonably inquired may be different for different user'ss (user group). That is, the applicability of FSTP expert system is limited to such restrictive condition --- it is when analyzing more common creative activity It is unacceptable --- it automatically ensure that by being searched in detail by user about this by FSTP expert system The limited solution to the problem that the inquiry for the finity state machine established when analyzing PTR is established.Therefore it is presumed that FSTP User be in the administration of justice qualified/have powerful connections/be absorbed in/it is interested, and its inquiry is generally legal nature, However, and technology, the related properties of the TTs of PTR it is analyzed --- be limited to agree between FSTP and its user The mode (being expansible as described above) of limited set.

Being supplied to its user by FSTP can be by its management+department of statistic to meet the subsequent example of the function of its needs System executes on his current WS.All these and subsequent detailed description refers to preferred embodiment, therefore to the patent Shen There is no limit for the scope of the claims please:

■ creation/determination/isolation/... WS,

Its item of information (referring to IV chapters and sections) is input in its RDB in various presentations by ■, or from various expressions Its RDB output goes to other sources from/go to him and/or from/, such as external data base or FSTP center system itself,

■ creation/determination/generation/screening/modification/transformation/protection/monitoring/... its is RDB such,

The fact that ■ determines RDB and verify RDB,

■ determines that current FSTP is true, creation/determination/generation/screening/modification/transformation/protection/monitoring/... its IADB , and its IADB is verified,

■ is directed to real time inquiring/answer, establishes WS,

■ issues real time inquiring/answer,

■ record counts and reports any activity,

The virtual condition to show WS is presented by least one user by ■.

These are executed by FSTP operating, it is required specifically to use existing and well known information presentation system, database System, communication system, firewall system, log in/monitoring/track/tracking/count/... system (=" SYSLOG "), document rope The technology for drawing/marking such system of/automatic system and based on other advanced/research, as one in relation to technical ability Point.

The big box of Fig. 1 b schematically shows the allomeric function structure of center system first.Client terminal 1b.15's A part is as shown in 1b.1 to 1b.3.Their interface --- and interface of external data base 1b.30 --- is by for practical On input to FSTP center system 1b.20 and/or deposited by the transient state of center system of the information of FSTP center system 1b.20 output Storage device 1b.4 to 1b.6 is supported.Its presentation system 1b.21 needs these transient state storage devices will be defeated by these interfaces Enter/a part of output information is transformed into following content, or converts to following content:

Physics of the ■ 1b.4 into 1b.6 is presented --- be actually by client terminal 1c.1 to 1c.5 it is producible/can manage Solution, therefore predetermined by the latter --- to/from it

■ is actually presented by producible/intelligible physics of center system 1b.21.

These interactions between center system and client terminal are using the external data base being used by it in Just determining physical message of the transient state storage device 1b.4 of centre system into 1b.6 is presented by interface 1b.7 to 1b.10 Instead of.

The internal functional architecture and its primary interface that Fig. 1 b also schematically shows center system 1b.20 are (with arrow table Show).In addition to system 1b.21 is presented in it --- execute above-mentioned transformation by FSTP between the physical message that uses of inside is presented simultaneously And executed by its various user and external data base --- " working set, the WS " of the PTR analysis of the WS in center system Management+statistical system 1b.22.These systems include managing WS for workable in the analysis/access right of ontology for using Sharp (as Fig. 4 b is explained into 4j), controls any outside access --- by PS 1b.21 --- for the WS and its information Access and access by the WS and its item of information, and keep the tracking for any such access to reach system Count purpose.

That is: WS includes: the specific local copies of center system of a part of ontology --- divides including the PTR in the user In analysis, wherein the information is the Local treatment active pointer by FSTP to the analysis increase/update.The additional information be due to Two knowledge transformation functions that FSTP is executed according to the request of its user and to WS.A part of such WS partial transformation is shown Example is: execution information acquisition/separation function (1b.29), the function (1b.23) of information sifting, various as described in putting sentence above The function of the function (1b.24) of fact transformation, the function (1b.25) of true determination/proof/determination and true set/verifying (1b.26)。

The exemplary other aspects of total " using structure " of FSTP expert system are shown schematically as entirety by Fig. 1 c And its in any PTR analysis passes through the/access ability of center system that is carried out by internet to external system. FSTP user via FSTP www server 1c.10 (as be based on Apache system), pass through FSTP client terminal 1c.1 to 1c.5 Come using FSTP expert system, www server 1c.10 be used as through their presentation to the center system 1c.11-12 of FSTP and First doorkeeper of the access of WS management system.The latter is using external (that is, non-FSTP) database and/or knowledge base system, such as Europe/Germany EPO, BGH, BPatG, JURIS, GRUR, DIN, BSI, AFNOR ... or the Supreme Court (Supreme Judicial Court of USA Institute), FCAC, USPTO, ANSI, WestLaw ... database and/or knowledge base system --- it is all these all have they from System/interface (not being described in detail herein) is presented in oneself property information.

The description of Fig. 1 a to 1c mainly explains the externally visible function and usage structure of FSTP, and Fig. 1 d to 1c is mainly detailed Describe each function aspect and its interface of the system being integrated in FSTP center system --- independently of the public or big It is not proprietary anyway in most cases --- this can be by the embodiment of FSTP expert system come using to provide it Function disclosed above.

Fig. 1 d instantiates the letter for handling some proof by its functional module and its RDB and IADB in WS with double-headed arrow Possible control stream in breath (then referred to as " document ").The document --- such as, PDF, doc, txt, xml.Html, tiff text Offer perhaps certain other presentation --- it is perhaps directly inputted or by FSTP by him according to WS user by user by GUI input Request/order directly obtained from external data base.If document presentation has not included advanced text analysis system institute The machine readable character needed, e.g., if it is the presentation based on bitmap, FSTP may execute optical character identification to it (OCR) etc., to generate the accessible presentation of the machine.Then, it can be used such as Apache Lucene or some other index Tool is indexed document, is generated with executing such as full text this keyword recognition/search and dictionary.Then, FSTP can be held Certain probability text analyzing of row, it may be possible to that natural language syntax is supported and/or may be by part-of-speech tagging (and analysis) POST (A) System --- does not have to WS user as far as possible in order to identify key item and related symbol to identify --- and these in document Semantic relation between.Then, in document such keyword and the related knowledge of relationship in itself (that is, Its original and/or FSTP transformation presentation) --- establishing it in WS, " raw data base, they is full when RDB " Portion --- and the relationship of the other information in they and WS is stored in " the inside access database, in IADB ": at PTR points of WS In analysis, in all facts of access all kinds, and their all disclosures are proved, and by all disclosures True all steps on formal basis are transformed into, and the formal fact is transformed into other formal true all steps Suddenly and proof/detailed description/verifying/consistency desired result/note/link/display/... all steps of the fact, with And in rear all facts to access all kinds when tracking any such transformation and they are managed as those In terms of forward transform (as more generally disclosed above), IADB provides the technical pattern of highly organized shortcut.

RDB and IADB can be considered as what the information (item of information) being stored separately or be considered as stored superposed on one anotherly. Anyway, all these items of information can deliver for him at once when WS user requests.

End, it is noted that in Fig. 1 d,

These functions of ■ whole --- illustrating only certain in above-mentioned various functions --- establish knowledge transformation (defined in I.A chapters and sections) 1. centers and 2. centers, and

The execution of these functions of ■ does not need directly to be exercised by WS user, but can be by him by exercising some very Different function to exercise indirectly (Tathagata from 1. centers of knowledge transformation, therefore 2. centers of the enforcement from knowledge transformation Some function, vice versa).

Fig. 1 e provides the SW about FSTP by showing the purposes level between 1. centers of knowledge transformation and 2. centers The general introduction of function structure.Therefore, it discloses the specific technology computers of patent/project of the FSTP in FSTP expert system to connect The architecture arrangement and their functional module functionally of mouth.It is enabled it to using these functional modules and its computer interface It is enough --- in analysis PTR device and later under real-time conditions using the analysis as a result, the control of its user it Under ---

All documents are inputed to its user/from its user and exported, inputed to outer by 2. centers of knowledge transformation by ■ Portion's database/exporting, input to 1. centers of knowledge transformation from external data base/is exported from 1. centers of knowledge transformation, and Index and management (by means of the above RDB and IADB) these documents and its item, to provide its function to him according to the request of its user Can, and

■ is by 1. centers of knowledge transformation, as being supplied to it by 2. centers of knowledge transformation, possibly at one or The informal true of PTR and formally is interactively determined under the control of several context ontologies and/or with FSTP user True, institute's transformation in need between them, its brass tacks/semanteme it is true/creative it is true, determined for these and in fact 2. centers of knowledge transformation will be returned to comprising the document of all such information to be integrated into the above RDB and IADB on border Performed all steps.

I.K The potential about State Patent Office of FSTP expert system

The chapters and sections outline the processing of examination (review) patent that can simplify any Patent Office significantly and/or its application FSTP expert system.

Due to above description, for the patent of business and the application of similar invention --- that is, for handling invisible thing The application of the patent of business also sets up most of patents related with advanced technology, because major part therein is all Based on model --- it quickly will quantitatively significantly be more than the application for being used for MoT patent.This will pro change any special The work overview of sharp method: therefore, complicated test becomes essential, this provides the (non-) aobvious of the bad property of absolute confidence to invent And being clear to property indicates.Instantly, only FSTP test tool has the quality that (referring to I.A to I.B chapters and sections).

Processing for examination (review) patent of Patent Office, the test (using FSTP term/express the meaning):

■ indicates the expection of the TT.p of the patent and aobvious by enabling Patent Office reversely to provide by its prior art And the burden of the technology fact of being clear to property being not present, auditor is released from its most of routine work.It is assumed that (no) there are such expection/apparent sexual behavior is real --- being the main reason for work of auditor is overstock --- therefore no longer Leave auditor for.On the contrary, application together with its patent application for TT.p need to obey undoubtedly and accurate indicative skill Art is true (e.g., as FSTP test provided by), enable auditor concentrate discuss assessment be presented to he these are indicative Technology it is true, that is, concentrate the small and most important segment that his routine work is discussed.The reversed evidence --- together with following general The support for the auditor's work stated --- his patent handling capacity is improved about ten times.

■ makes patent examiner --- only in law court's case defense/pendente lite before its inventor and lawyer/ After juror/judge/expert --- it canImmediatelyAccess it is related with any TT.p details it is any for information about, this is helped In the apparent property instruction of its (non-) novelty/(non-), therefore immediately eliminateIt is related any with any such details True uncertainty, statement related with such details is usually obscured but regardless of participant.

The plcs that ■ begins look for the i.e. PTR of the TT.p from its RS to auditor's (as tested by FSTP) is true and shows Influence of the pmgp to it, the i.e. all possible most short mode of the pmgp fact of PTR.This provide auditor and law court for The opinion (before unknown) of all logic details of TT.p and effective details.

Therefore, the PTO determination of the apparent property of (non-) novelty of TT.p and/or (non-) can be with

What ■ was not only mainly to simplify/accelerate relative to this test of some RS by the TT.p, the RS is by being used for Its patent application is established --- and wherein, the TT.p phase can accurate to him and fully be exposed by returning to the test from auditor All plcs facts and pmgp for the RS of the prior art are true, however

■ is even stablized significantly to be verified later by law court: the FSTP test of TT.p can be similarly law court's work Make, therefore, law court can assess the identical fact such as the auditor by PTO.

Such change of the operation mode of Patent Office exactly so that its with building supervisory organ in an identical manner Operation: the mechanism cannot even consider that oneself determines whether building firmly constructs relative to ground --- however, priori is permitted The proof (proving that the building is firm) can be provided to following building owner.That is: building supervisory organ can be with It only verifies and confirms his proof, or do not verify and confirm his proof, count, authorization foundation/safeguard the building or refuse Absolutely it.

Above content can be summarized as follows.It up to now, still can not be high by the creativeness of TT.p compared with the existing technology The proof of degree submits to PTO together with the application of the patent right for obtaining TT.p, can be easily by its auditor come again It runs and is understood completely.FSTP expert system terminates the situation of the misfortune.It enables inventor thinking that PTO submits it Before, oneself realizes the proof for its TT.p: it is accomplished in this way by supporting inventor to generate the proof in the following way : (it is required that correctness of semi-automatic its reasoning of inspection in several inside)) is analyzed by means of its FSTP, and :) by means of real-time Inquire answer system.Therefore, which can be delivered to PTO by USB stick, execute on any PC, therefore, can be by examining The person of looking into verifies and proves/refuses, simple as being only envisaged that.It only needs to verify by such verification that auditor carries out Its disclosure is transformed into the correctness of presentation required for FSTP by inventor.

Invented as business --- only and based on model, that is, any other the invention based on technology --- PTO's is anti- It is not interchangeable to being proved to be.By these invention institute by means of extremely complex knowledge outburst, absolutely unimaginable PTO Human resources can quantitatively with get caught up in it in quality.They demonstrate this point in past 20 years overstocked.

It is last: for automatic translation patent --- as contemplated by EU and Google --- absolutely inevitably with Them are presented in " FSTP analysis mode ".I.M chapters and sections are described in detail with the patent business for being somebody's turn to do " mode of FSTP idea " hint Other basic variations.

I.L FSTP about business/environmental protection/health/copyright/trade mark/.../invention potential

Although preceding chapters and sections do not concentrate nowhere the FSTP that MoT PTR is discussed to analyze --- MoT PTR is so far most The problem that simply formally accurately can define may have the problem of great interest economically.However, now, emphasizing FSTP analysis is applied to more complicated business/environmental protection/health/copyright/trade mark field potential of Patent Law --- referred to as Based on model replacement based on tangible affairs with the subject fields of consistent requirement.

In soil on the basis of wealth and industrial wealth, ever-increasing intellectual property stimulates current economy, especially It is their health creation engine: their Knowledge based engineering enterprise.In fact, in auto industry, as in chemical industry, with And in all other industry, many pervious industrial enterprises are undergoing the enterprise for changing and becoming increasingly based on knowledge Industry --- their IPR becomes one of its most important physical assets, especially their patent right.

The result is that the outburst of the movable quantity and complexity patented.Influence for PTO: unacceptable length The examination of phase --- present average out to 5 years.

Although some advocates that the outburst is to recognize that too easy and very common patent as the possibility for health creation Resource expression, and other opinion outbursts are caused due to allowing business patent subsequent hopes stimulation gold rush 's.The latter agrees to the old and universal feeling in Europe: operation business is usually that ordinary (such as obscene journal is worldwide Usually advocated, and conveyed now by many daily soap operas).Therefore, in Europe, this opinion is popular, only It is related with " technology " more than such clumsiness, patent should be obtained --- to ban this towards the ordinary and quality claimed Trend.In US, recently, CAFC has initiated some like trial: it is assumed that " machine " or " transformation " only can be passed through in invention Invention is suitable acquirement patent in the case where test (MoT test).

However, nobody can define " technicity " is meant that or what " transformation " be for what or " machine ". In addition, not studying indication: from obtain " non-technical " of patent, exclude can to can increase quality level in " non-MoT " invention and/ Or the quantity of remaining patent application --- these have fully overwhelmed EPO and USPTO.In US, this supertition by The Bilski judgement of Supreme law court is terminated, and in EU, the refusal of business patent still robustly exist and only once in a while by Query.2008/03 judgement along having plenty of of occurring herein of the line for the EPO of software inventions, which confirms its about The position earlier of the problem: they are suitable for patentability, because they are usually to have with technicity (last part of judgement seems to attempt to be in jeopardy again, referring to I.A.6 chapters and sections) closed --- but not including that business is sent out It is bright.

Therefore, US understands following content: Patent Law should disclose the potential for all spectra that it motivates US economy Novelty, and in EU, the refusal of business patent is dominant --- economic influence may be abandoned swashing using this without recognizing Encourage the update to push business.

Oppose that one of reason for obtaining the patent right of business invention is: they handle invisible affairs, therefore make If not the visualization for obtaining them is that sky then dies down.The particular problem of this feeling is: it is intolerable, because it is not only answered For commercially/environmental protection/health invention, but also it is applied to not reprocess tangible affairs but model (telecommunications, brain of processing something Surgery ..., all advanced technologies) technological invention.That is: these problems have existed for a long time, such as coding techniques, but By and by as encoded, and its model become so to be familiar with so that we for their intuition as they are that have Shape affairs.

Since there is no the business prototype established for a long time, therefore, they cannot be based on for the description of business invention, because This, by keeping diffusion even to cover them and increase more uncertainties --- referring to Bilski patent especially its debate Shield.Reason is: (non-) apparent property problem is expressly understood not over MoT technology in auditor, lawyer and judge, but It is to be invented by business, they absolutely not understand that the essence for the problem of they are struggling against is --- do not know with can not It is the challenge in the theory of knowledge that the mode of blame, which recognizes and describes it, them are clearly proficient in oneself, and there is no simply matched It is standby --- because this needs very basic research (referring to I.D-I.G chapters and sections).

As described above, the problem of " apparent property " is most critical related with this mode for correctly quantifying invention: It later, i.e., is all inevitably unessential to any innovation of invisible theme, that is, obvious.This is true.Although this A problem usually has existed MoT invention, however, it is bad dream when processing business is invented, as it is likely that will It is applied to have existed very similar business before obtaining patent.

Eliminate the evergreen that this bad dream needs to solve the problems, such as Patent Law, that is, the also problem related with MoT affairs:

■ patent language factions, i.e.,

Zero patent legislation organ: being technically the language of layman (referring to base of the Supreme law court in its Bilski judgement Present principles).

Zero patent document: only the language of technical staff is possible --- it is greatly ignored by law court.

The big problem of any natural language of ■: lacking technology accuracy --- only to be overcome by formalized.

As shown above.Since very different and immanent language issues and accuracy problem do not handle acquirement The research effort of patent right knows the potential of these puzzlements, --- their main deficiency is:

■ does not solve the problems, such as the basis in the theory of knowledge of the technology of apparent property, and

■ how by means of precedent and the lawsuit in the idea of its " simple syntax driving " needs.

That is, although highly significant, thinks deeply however, they lack in terms of practical help.

In addition, during upper several weeks, i.e. on March 8th, 2011, in US senator and on March 9th, 2011, in EU, patent The important movement for aspect of making laws, though it is shown that certain convergence of great Patent Law treaty (SPLT) environment of WTO/WIPO, However these very basic problems of the Patent Law of Atlantic Ocean two sides are had ignored, this needs to overcome this business --- and institute Some is based on model --- the solution of the predicament of patent.

Therefore, for how determining these critical issues --- it supports with patentability or not patentability business to send out Bright (only between US and EU, and actually existing in the camp Liang Ge) related arguement --- valuable suggestion most Jia Yuan is the suggestion of the precedent and its hint of the Supreme Judicial Court, and as the KSR of US is adjudicated, (Justice Kennedy implies creation herein Property be critical issue) or Germany Spannschrauben (1996)/(2008) it adjudicates (correctly point out significant patent/claim is explained only possible based on utterly clear term// technical teaching of expressing the meaning, It has been common knowledge in terms of IT science since the seventies, recently, become " vocabulary basis/syntax basis/semantic basis // Effective basis ").The judgements of these Supreme Judicial Courts implies: creativeness/originality be and how can with and must can know It is other and measurable --- therefore a kind of also invent to business is needed to provide the technology of permanent organization.Wish this year later The action also implied using these can be initiated in G20.

Thereafter, FSTP test (screening of the FSTP=fact and transform processor), which overcomes, establishes the justifiable of business invention All these obstacles on the road of facts analyzing --- its be also applied to all environmental protection/health/... invention, rather than only MoT Invention.Its for it is innovative determine --- independently of its subject area --- its relative to the prior art in its invention " creative height ".Therefore, the creative height of innovation also known as invention being defined as since the prior art, that is, from existing Any combination of technology starts, and to be put to the independent idea of its minimum number of creation.

Therefore, FSTP method makes it possible to indisputablely in any subject fields, such as environmentally friendly or healthy main in business Topic field determines the creative height of the minimum of invention --- the creative height of the minimum measured in independent idea.

That is: if business invention is certified as having significant creative height, Q relative to its prior art^pmgp, then this To be non-obvious same strong instruction it establishes it, as approving that MoT invention has such Q^pmgpValue.At this In the case of two kinds, this value is to be put to the quantity for the inventive idea for finding invention.Therefore, it still maintains, the business Invention is only the discrimination (unless they violate law) of business invention group due to inessential rather than patentability --- and Therefore constitution is not all met in many countries.

Other considerations related with these closer patents are no less importants, and in next main description.

" technical " business/environmental protection to be solved/health/copyright/trade mark/political issue, which is arranged, to be indicated to provide its quotient Industry/environmental protection/health/copyright/trade mark/political nature and exploring solves its sufficiently accurate description of TT.p, and (natural language is retouched State), to allow to be converted into formal attribute (seeing above).This TT.p --- but also related technical staff's energy It is enough --- so that it becomes business/environmental protection/health/copyright/trade mark/politics TT.p, and, embodiment/reality as the TT.p Existing product is business/environmental protection/health/copyright/trade mark/politics technical products.In addition, from related business/environmental protection/be good for The TT.p that health/copyright/trade mark/political realms are claimed is by limitation same as described above.

To from one of these fields TT.p carry out FSTP analysis purpose be not directed to the TT.p can be special Benefit is indicated, but is related to the Trust Establishment firstly for the TT.p.It is known that selling any kind of height innovation Product may meet with a large amount of reserved, continually proved completely --- but the simultaneously as height that they are embodied Novelty --- its be inevitably accompanied by the foreignness of such product certain feeling, can postpone significantly Their the wide receiving by market.In order to avoid such negative effect of the product for sale height innovation --- due to They are it is known that appear in especially business/environmental protection/health/copyright/trade mark/politics product --- or at least make in this way Influence minimize, it is worth: to accelerate Trust Establishment therein, so that they are actually more excellent than related prior art products More, that is, (as described below) is become possible to by using the initiation idea of FSTP expert system.

Such " similar patent problem " environmental protection/simple example of health/copyright/trade mark/political issue two is shown Out: " the term decline " of traditional intelligent marketing campaign can not individually establish such trust, because producing with the prior art The property (also known as TT.i) of product is compared, and such term must be linked at once to be also known as TT.p by higher level's property of market product To support.

■ sets the title that " POWER " is new environment-friendly products, and compared with existing soft candy product, completely new advanced soft sweets are kept away Exempted from the damage to tooth and even reduced the weakness of muscle in such a way that certain is novel --- it is all these be all due to The interaction of certain natural ingredients and they and human body.The title of these ingredients on new soft sweets sack is almost not It is convictive.The reserved more reversions in market are to be created by once available credible information by internet access , be designed to by Anywhere/whenever available mobile phone etc. is come the FSTP expert system of the analysis for POWER, This demonstrate that --- individually in response to any inquiry of possible POWER client --- due to the compound of its natural component And/or for the tooth of eater and the detailed beneficial effect of muscle, POWER is superior relative to any prior art soft sweets Property, which is supported by the quotation of medical analysis and laboratory report from proof, or even be changed into separately by abductive reasoning Outer reasonable one or it is supplemented with other reasonable one to determine any such inquiry.

■ sets the title that " EVERON " is new health-oriented products, compared with the anti-MS drug of the prior art, completely new MS solution Poison substantially reduces well-known MS symptom, although avoiding its most of side effect, without generating other secondary work With.As described above, the current common isolated term in the packaging of EVERON is for its client almost without help.More Importantly, realizing FSTP points of EVRON for the at once and simultaneously available access of FSTP expert system by internet Analysis, to provide the creative height of EVERON MS drug compared with the existing technology --- about for MS symptom, its reason and its The combined influence of interaction.

Obvious: in environmental protection/health/copyright/trade mark/political realms, there are many such problems.

Finally, with regard to the ability of " to the origin for returning property and its hint that tracer request is protected " of FSTP: being used to inquiry Family provides this ability --- the possible purchase of product is especially generated to such environmental protection/health/copyright/trade mark/common recognition Person --- it can not only be understood by the latter, but also can be understood by the promoter of these properties, and therefore rewarded by them.

In a word: business/environmental protection/health/copyright/trade mark/political innovation/invention/TT.p can be by public (not free) Acceptable FSTP expert system is transformed into promotion/market instruments of TT.p, the following ability without suspecting FSTP expert system: A) TT.p, b are identified) all, c) environmental protection/health/copyright/trade mark/common recognition for distinguishing itself and all kinds generates the prior art Undeniable/indubitable fact of property/fact, d) pass through the following superiority for carefully describing TT.p: " by TT.p Business/environmental protection/health/copyright/trade mark/common recognition generation technology (that is, the objective creativeness by TT.p compared with the existing technology Height Q^pmgp>=1) push back, it is undesirable to forward position inevitably by society fight ".

This promotion for such venture is clearly impossible in the case where no FSTP expert system.Cause This, this promotion purposes of FSTP expert system:

■ can accelerate wide acceptance significantly, and therefore accelerate the wound of the technology for the type that especially these are new Newly, the hope --- the main reason for being with patent system --- of following health of main carrying and

■ is not limited to above-mentioned technology, because, by encouraging its possible user to learn its innovative fact come to innovation The promotion that product carries out the FSTP type can also support traditional technology.

I.M The application with each factual aspect in PTR to national patent method of FSTP automate related latent Energy

I.M chapters and sections detailed description are as follows problem: the just solution party of the PTR problem in this case or even in NPS Case can by FSTP rather than the fact that indicate the solution automatically determine.In order to realize at least process as some, The part a. to the part c. (referring to I.B.2 chapters and sections) of pmgp --- it is indicated generally at " to the public affairs of the specification on true express the meaning Positive explanation, NNI ", although a. and c. are international --- it must formally be modeled, so that FSTP will can be automatically somebody's turn to do NNI is applied to the fact determined in the step that the FSTP of its PTR is analyzed at the NNI, with evaluate these it is true until Its fact that " final/non-authorization " (see below, wherein in a NPS, any NNI application is all based on expected/open Some plcs option of content¹⁴⁾)。

Firstly, following total comment/prompt i) is mentioned to the principle that be applied to realizing such process v) is outlined for it Same wide context is supplied, and so that in the following right related with FSTP expert system for explaining patent application It is required that when " the global frame " to be remembered be known:

I) three term NPS/NLS/NNI --- not having the same meaning --- however can substantially be used as Synonym, meaning indicate the NNI or part of it formally modeled on the body.

Ii technical secondary basic and/or semantically (=the plcs) and/or NNI of PTR) are determined by it (=" pmgp/a. to c. ") true ability, the FSTP analyzer of invention will also express the meaning " jural certainty " (evaluating When PTR in NPS) a part: translate into (partly) automatic/formal PTR from the presentation in the non-program of its natural language and survey It tries and therefore translates into the presentation in (expressing the meaning " jural certainty " when evaluating the PTR in NPS) program.The test is set Method delivering indicates the unquestionable fact of the TT.p relative to (non-) apparent property of its RS.Therefore, in NPS " legally Certainty " meaning/express the meaning the law court for representing the NPS, technical specialist and auditor to the NNI absolutely abide by (in determination PTR problem these it is true and when legally evaluating them).

That is: some NNI (a part) --- being input in FSTP --- by the latter translate into expression/realization at this The related jural deterministic algorithm of PTR problem is legally analyzed under NPS.These algorithms can be performed on PTR, and because The otherwise fact that this delivering will be determined by abiding by the above-mentioned NPS of judicial personnel, that is, delivering is related with the PTR problem is analyzed Jural decision.The NNI (a part) inputs to FSTP by its user and explains for specific PTR, or " by manual The PTR " or " independently as the PTR of formal ontology " individually realized.These NNI control algorithm be applied to PTR Its explanation at the NNI.

When distinguishing the different fact of following three classes during the explanation in PTR and determining --- the FSTP also known as under identical NNI Analysis --- its dependence for the NNI:

A) " plcs is true/freely true " for not influencing the PTR fatefully, because its definition is independently of NNI¹⁴⁾,

B) " NNI is true " of the PTR may be influenced --- therefore, different from true/free thing of plcs of the PTR It is real¹⁴⁾--- and

C) its " final fact/non-authorized the fact " is most possibly influenced, because this part of NNI is (that is, evaluate it NNI is true) it is pure politics.

That is: the algorithm of such NNI control can be established for PTR the jural certainty in NPS until only its Plcs is true/common true¹⁴⁾Or its entire NNI is true¹⁴⁾Or even its prefinal fact/non-authorization the fact (be Or be not NNI independent).

The FSTP of PTR is analyzed for will a) be briefly discussed to dependence c) in I.M.1 into I.M.3 chapters and sections.

These of the fact that iii) for variety classes determine a) to any of these NNI in c) --- these Any of fact obey it is unessential " freely/.../.../it is common " difference¹⁴⁾--- it sets up: if its (still)

It 1) is not that formally can model and/or formally be modeled (e.g., due to lacking in associated society/law On fully accurately know together or be unaware of or disagree its need or ...), and/or

It 2) is not automatically interpretable by FSTP, and/or

3) be not can be applied to the fact in preceding determination of PTR by FSTP, and/or

4) it is not input to FSTP,

When being prompted in PTR is analyzed by FSTP, FSTP user's himself/herself oneself must make a decision.Otherwise, FSTP analyzer may not complete to determine that these are true a) to one in c)¹⁴⁾.About why for all possible 1) PTR in fact can be avoided that one appearance in 4), there is extraordinary reason, and as any PTR, NNI is to its fact Possibility influence quantity be limited¹⁴⁾。

Alternatively, FSTP can complete about only NNI (a part) without influenced by its " link lost " these Partially (therefore, delivering is a kind of " FSTP of the fragment of the PTR at such NNI is analyzed ", can determine this for its PTR analysis NNI's loses/non-acceptable/part having a question and their influences for the FSTP analysis of PTR) and/or it is similar Part that ground automatically has a question such (possible part under the control of FSTP user and/or correspondingly emphasize it Part) be added to content described in I.B.2.e chapters and sections.

Iv) each of FSTP automatic machine in the analysis of PTR and each decision must and can be presented to its user (wherein, he/her does not need to be actually that how to be completed by it fuzzy is thought with the task intelligible ad-hoc completely Method).That is: it must can with certain presentation according to the request of its user by FSTP expert system (that is, 2. centers of knowledge transformation) It is presented to him/her --- even in real time with " arguement mode ", this can be realized by means of standard database technology, in particular by Its " swinging to document " can be achieved --- and the sufficient item including such as indicating that these are determined (is mentioned with 1. centers of knowledge transformation For) in FSTP analyzer realize its determine required for item alternative item, vice versa.

V) the latter's ability includes: and is guaranteed by FSTP, if its user requests, the reduction of the possibility of the PTR such as with its NNI thing There is no " link of decline " in the FSTP analysis of real relevant decision --- such as, it illustrates all in WS for the decision And support its all their combinations purposes.The requirement is also applied to FSTP analyzer and verifies any claimed AC It is actually pair or wrong.

In a word: if formalized to NNI progress for PTR, all such links lost are all excluded, then FSTP is complete Whether the TT.p that can automatically determine and (that is: act on without any user) PTR entirely is patentability relative to its RS: therefore it is certainly Body can point out the jural decision and " can pass through mathematical proof " and establish jural determination in the NPS Property --- obey the final jural approval of law court.I.e.: therefore, FSTP analyzer no longer needs for its own to be limited to only to know , not determining and being described in detail indicates the plcs fact/pmgp of its TT.p relative to (non-) apparent property of its RS for the PTR True (and the just of law court will be left for the estimation of these technical formal secondary plcs facts and the pmgp fact Decision) --- however, therefore, FSTP automatic machine can also will be applied to its current precedent for the PTR problem determination And how current precedent is applied to it.It is true according to the technical formal secondary NNI of the PTR, by means of in addition NNI to be applied explains it, and it is true can also formally to obtain prefinal (legally, not yet being authorized by law court).

I.M.1-does not have NNI to influence this by being defined as being correct the plcs fact/free fact of PTR¹⁴⁾.So And: when execute they based on technical ability to formal D attribute/B attribute/D concept/B concept transformation when, in fact it could happen that with The related problem of the meaning of the technical basic fact of PTR (be not based on the transformation, with the technical main of PTR or The secondary formal fact of person is related).It that is: may be in the disclosure using natural language text and/or the document of its attached drawing The ambiguity claimed except, and by means of formal D attribute/B attribute/D concept/B concept Accurate Model it Outside, argue --- wherein, two steps are all guided by related technical ability, referring to I.A to I.E chapters and sections.

It is such arguement except the range of present patent application, that is, must be determined by law court (based on themselves or The technological know-how of person expert, referring to I.M.4 chapters and sections).That is: for PTR, due to law court for these translations based on technology not With judgement --- rather than due to different NNI, it is understood that there may be different plcs is true/freely true.

I.M.2-influences to analyze the FSTP of PTR for the possible NNI of the plcs fact/free fact of PTR, about The plcs how NNI can influence PTR is true/freely true, and there are 3 kinds of different modes: by forcing i) on its AC " plcs limitation¹⁴⁾", ii) " legal restriction " and/or iii) " technical ability limitation ".In I.B.2 chapters and sections, i) and the ii) NNI of type Limitation is represented as the limitation of " b.pmgp " type, iii) NNI of type limits the limitation as " c.pmgp " type.Although really The influence for determining i) type is significantly limited practice¹⁴⁾, however, determine ii) and/or iii) influence of type by being limited Practice can be limited for some maximum complexity¹⁴⁾.Therefore, since I.M.1, FSTP can usually determine the NNI of PTR It is true¹⁴⁾--- at least up to " the NNI complexity of some maximum tolerance¹⁴⁾", as shown in the WATSON engineering of IBM.

In addition, it could even be possible to it is furthermore interesting that: for many PTR (regardless of possible and usually unessential plcs is limited It is processed i)), NNI may not have completely any influence for its plcs fact --- furthermore, wherein this usually can by FSTP from It is dynamic to determine (as described below) --- otherwise, this must be pointed out by FSTP user " passing through manually/thinking " and be input to FSTP Analyzer (together with proof document/defense appropriate).

NNI is provided independently of an example of the TT.p of PTR by ' 884 patents, that is, by relative to ' 884-PTR's shows There are ' 884 TT.p of technology RS.Then, author " passes through manually/thinking " first and pleads to the independence, and then solves Release how FSTP analyzer can automatically determine it.

In ' 884 priority dates, ' 884 TT.p are absolutely unique --- compared with its prior art, and specifically, Compared with absolute novel ' the 884 problem setting that the substantially real-time internet data transmission for being suitable for Internet Protocol telephone is provided, Both it is disclosed in ' 884 specifications for supporting its claim^1),2)--- as passed through its (referring to II.A.1.2 chapters and sections)

(1) it recognizes the need for being considered entire communication connection by passing from its source terminal to its data for declining terminal overall length Send foundation --- when it starts to determine whether beginning PSTN is suitable --- that is, without its data transmission for being only through internet (because the PSTN in internet telephone cell may be as in the switching as required for internet telephone cell data transmission Caused by one non-availability of transient state in additional resource, and it is fabulous by the Internet transmission data),

(2) by internet be also known as packet-switched network start the terminal-to-terminal service data transmission (' 902US patent Call in claim 68 and 69) unconditional determination,

(3) it individually monitors the ability of considered communication connection and its signal is made to generate (start to convert) technically Ability based on the very specific monitoring result, wherein

(4) signal generates to obey and generates the clearly disclosed of its and limit (referring to II.A.1.2 chapters and sections), when coming under observation The specific transmission meet with

A. some bandwidth threshold is dropped into hereinafter, therefore protecteding from the influence of various " transmission hinders "

B. it is more than some bandwidth threshold, therefore protecteds from the influence of various " overloads ", or

C. data packet transfer problem, therefore the influence of (exchange) local problem of various communications is protecteded from, it examines simultaneously Consider the terminal of communication connection,

(5) ability of communication connection, Yi Jiqi are influenced in conversion

(6) specific positive strategy (retreating for starting the PSTN): it is not to wait for (communication connection) data and passes Defeated possible insignificant problem is actually the no quality that can show the data transmission to the Internet telephony Influence, once however, its detect the data transmission some definition the shortcomings that (such as disadvantage related with forward direction IP data packet Or drop into bandwidth threshold therein or less/be more than bandwidth threshold therein), then after its first interchanger starts PSTN Move back --- therefore, PSTN can also be started completely without it and retreat (referring to II.A.1.2 chapters and sections).

The Accurate Model of the new feature of this 6 (and certain other) of ' 884 TT.p (referring to II.A.2 chapters and sections)

■ needs at least 28 independent B concepts¹⁰⁾, each idea for representing independent novelty^10),14),16), and

■ is shown: no one of 16 existing technical literature i/TT.i have minimum expection ' 884TT.p or more The possibility of novelty¹⁴⁾(details refers to II.A.1.3 to II.A.2 chapters and sections).

' 884 specific opinions are --- related on the possible influence of the plcs fact of PTR with NNI --- to be allowed: being directed toEntirely New TT.p directly generates its plcs fact equal to the pmgp fact, and otherwise, the present invention is notEntirelyNew, therefore, NNI is right Its is minimum, and its part is expected.In addition, if its prior art for being claimedIts all concepts is not known at least, then invent TT.p is completely new --- it is applied to ' 884-TT.p several fold¹⁰⁾Both with FSTP-TT.p.

I.M.3-influences as I.M.2 chapters and sections, finally final true/non-possible NNI for auditing the fact of PTR The fact/non-authorization the fact have to receive the influence of NNI, that is, do not need also to reduce for Q^NNIDetermining value.Therefore, should Problem --- problem for automatically determining the influence --- and I.M.2 problem only difference is that: it is by the skill of PTR The fact that the secondary NNI fact in art has been transformed into the binary final fact/non-authorization " is being patrolled than all above-mentioned transformation Collect upper/technical " it is simpler, but in actual effect can be accurate (referring to I.M.4 chapters and sections).

There are three reasons for the accuracy.It is simple the reason is that, in fact it could happen that following situation: where the NNI fact is actually It is not conclusive/compulsory.Basic reason is, currently in all express the meaning or --- needless to say --- in the world It is upper there is no true universal of the NNI of PTR express the meaning on specification just explanation, NNI ' --- that is, there is no with will be by NNI ' is come the related widely consistent rule of specifically transformation that controls.It therefore, can be to model its view to the transformation The optimal direction NPS or law court direction form usual available NNI ' ontology.In addition, the worst reason is: expressing the meaning any In, NNI ' ontology (for example, FSTP patented technology) can be considered pair trial formalized as its view by law court The attack of independence, therefore they emulate receiving/time FSTP technology opposing reaction --- it is not subject to law The actual purpose studied science is accidental wide with the related law court of the clear fact that determines and explain their decision of support Wealthy free final reduction.

In the long run, FSTP patented technology is intended to accurately: instead of or at least reduce patent jurisdiction --- with it He compares jurisdiction, is the higher degree based on logic opinion and effective opinion that easily can be formalized --- according to Clear law (being indicated with its logic and practicability), how most absolutely prudent law court obtains the intrinsic thing of any PTR now Court decision real and from wherein acquirement patent.

The role of auditor, expert and law court in the such formalized determination processing of I.M.4-

Patent Law is applied to PTR problem (as I.M chapters and sections are presented) in this way can be to three in any NPS The role of group judicial personnel has significant impact: therefore, these roles can specifically include that legally to verify and verify and provide Input to PTR analyzer and the output generated by PTR analyzer.Therefore, which can be similar to the accounting voucher of company, And therefore, which can be similar to profit statement/loss statement and the balance sheet of company.All these three types of proofs Document --- inputting all accounting vouchers, export profit margin loss statement and the balance sheet of comment --- therefore can be with It must legally prove (and may be added) until some legal accounting standard (such as US by the auditor that law authenticates GAAP or IFRS), which may finally prove the legitimacy of the operation of the said firm.I.e.: therefore, this in any NPS The role of three groups of judicial personnels must become known in other legal fields/receive role.

Finally, two aspects of the decision processing formalized in this way for PTR problem are highlighted.

■ models NNI by ontology.Such processing can be by means of leading contract law in Patent Law field The research of the logical expressions of the regulatory rule in domain.Therefore, seem admirably to be understood, and therefore to such NNI main problem should not occur when being modeled, as described in following documents:

Zero " The Description Logic Handbook ", Edited by Baader et al., 2010, Cambridge University Press,

Zero " Formalizing by Ontologies Patent Precedents for the PTR Problem ", A.Paschke, ongoing research and also as indicated by IBM ' s WATSON project (referring to Above).

NNI ontology is located at one of two complexity levels, wherein many, and --- if not all --- it can position In in lower complexity level, that is, by means of only descriptive logic (the sub- logic of first order logic¹⁰⁾) it is located at classics Ontology and reasoning in lower complexity level.Here, formal reasoning from logic is " dullness ", i.e., pushed away in step n > 1 The fact that reason, cannot contradict in the fact that reasoning in step 1 previous≤m < n¹⁴⁾。

Realize that formal NNI ontology and the consistency of therefore accurate NNI ontology are towards the legal peace realized in NPS The essential first step of full property, as the difference between NPS --- and more in the world to they into Row coordinates or even standardization (because it is likely to appear in sooner or later between certain countries).

FSTP user's control of the ■ to the FSTP analysis of the NNI ontology control of PTR.NNI ontology in PTR analysis is to FSTP The automatic control of the reasoner of analyzer can enable FSTP user to supervise the control step by step.By means of user interface Allow to turn on/off the so-called NNI ontology mould based on " relay protective scheme " (still in descriptive logic, seeing above) " metaguard " function of type allows even to get along well with complicated NNI: therefore, FSTP user can be according to his/her Specific constraint of the activation/deactivation NNI to the plcs fact of PTR is needed, Patent Law to be applied to the TT.p phase with PTR For its RS novelty/apparent property related judgement when screen the total Options of law court.

Summarize I chapters and sections, FSTP engineering is mainly emphasised: by other than Berlin author, by from 9 national current 15 A professor runs with 22 PhD students, they are all concerned about the design and implementation of FSTP expert system, investigates at NPS The purposes of FSTP method and its application in terms of the national milestone formula judgement of the Supreme Judicial Court --- 2 professors and 6 PhD From birth from India.Its first purpose is research " patent law technology ", that is, Patent Law is increased to the new theory of knowledge of their own, It is sufficiently analogous to physics and science of mathematics, however it is even more basic than them.

II.The work of the embodiment of FSTP analyst --- it is explained with its application

II chapters and sections explain the work of the embodiment of FSTP described in I.J chapters and sections: the implementation at 1. centers of knowledge transformation Example --- it is herein European " patent of ' 884 " (0 929 884 B1 of EP) relative to its 16 as RS when completing PTR analysis A document i¹³⁾' 884 claims 2 PTR analysis --- and 2. centers of knowledge transformation PTR analysis, with execute by The brass tacks that the disclosure of the document of PTR translates into PTR analysis starts (referring to I.H chapters and sections).FSTP analyzer embodiment First step with traditional just process exact same way to determine that the technology fact starts --- for PTR's TT.p is essential for the expression of (non-) of its RS apparent property: being

■ first is true to determine the stage, is started with the fact on the basis in all the relevant technologies of determination, that is, TT.p's is non- Formal D-X) .n (related with all TT.i), obtain the X in document i first from it) equity of .n disclosure and they X.i) D- between .n disclosureANCRelationship (that is, the technical main fact of PTR, in US terminology are as follows: " graham " is true), therefore, B- is obtained from the latterANCRelationship⁴⁾(referring to II.A.1.1 to II.A.1.4 chapters and sections), and

■ second is true to determine the stage, automatically by D-ANC matrix/B-ANC matrixing of PTR at D level/B layers The technical secondary fact in grade is transformed into the basic plcs fact/pmgp fact (referring to II.A.2.1, II.A.2.2 Chapters and sections).

Therefore, the embodiment support of FSTP analyzer avoids in PTR analysis, by repeatedly checking that these are meant that It is no can accurately reflect support its¹⁾TT.p come when explaining, determined with not fully considering using the term of claim Meaning, so that contradiction is not also known as (referring to II.A.1.1 to II.A.1.2 chapters and sections) consistent with patent specification to these meanings. However, it is that simply, the real difficulty of D level due to the intricate of natural language and makes that this, which is sounded for layman, With the disclosure of the PTR document of natural language⁵⁾And it is usually inevitable (referring still to I.A to I.E chapters and sections).Know it The embodiment of FSTP analyzer can support these terms and be related to their meaning/properties/attributes from the technology fact D level information present be transformed into these technologies implementation above-mentioned B level information present --- in addition, also right as much as possible These meanings carry out formalized⁵⁾。

II.A chapters and sections describe the work of the embodiment of FSTP analyzer on the whole.For the sake of clarity, document is specific The fact determination be placed in II.B and II.C chapters and sections.

II.ATo the whole description of the embodiment of FSTP analyst——It is illustrated with ' 884 PTR

As described above, II.A chapters and sections are divided into II.A.1 chapters and sections and II.A.2 chapters and sections, by being applied to them‘884 PTRThe embodiment of the first, second true function of determining the stage of FSTP analyzer is explained on the whole, it will be to these facts FSTP user has been left in the evaluation of plcs independence and pmgp independence for, is such as directed to ' 884 cases¹⁰⁾It is shown (although the two is also all It can automatically be evaluated at least up to some limited pmgp complexity¹⁴⁾)。

■ II.A.1 chapters and sections are divided into the part II.A.1.1 to the part II.A.1.4, explain the implementation of FSTP analyzer 4 aspects of example (as understood as technical staff and are reflected from the natural language disclosure for correctly identifying/explaining patent In the prior art) and from them obtain the formal D- of PTRANCMatrix/B-ANCMatrix, however

■ II.A.2 chapters and sections are divided into the part II.A.2.1 to the part II.A.2.2, explain the implementation of FSTP analyzer Such as what is from such D-ANCMatrix/B-ANCThe technical secondary basic plcs fact/pmgp of matrix acquirement PTR (semantically/creative) true.

Fig. 5 a shows the function at 1. centers of the knowledge transformation in any FSTP analyzer embodiment in any PTR analysis Energy arouses.The first step (at the top of Fig. 5 a) of the present embodiment currently must interactively be executed by FSTP user, such as II.A.1.1 is explained to II.A.1.2 chapters and sections (and above plcs estimation/pmgp estimation).FSTP analyzer embodiment All other aspect autonomously can be performed by it.It is executable according to almost any sequence that Figure 5b shows that all these steps, As shown by arrows.

II.A.1 first is true determines the stage --- with ' 884-PTR is illustrated

Description of the II.A.1.1 to II.A.1.2 chapters and sections to FSTP analyzer embodiment --- shown by means of ' 884 patents Example --- it informs, for the technical staff in relation to field, for PTRCorrectly and fullyGrasp the element X's of TT.pAll related properties X) .n--- that is, in document p clearly with obscurely for TT.p^1),2)All skills use and disclosed All meaning X of art term X) .n --- it is not unessential.If these terms are in multiple documents with very different Meaning is continually used --- and be usually following situation: PTR comes from communication technology (see below), then this is most important pass The activity of key.Therefore, repeatedly read the disclosure of the property of these elements and carefully they are compared be must Indispensable: it does not find other approach of following content: actually disclosing these terms of TT.p in the specification of document p What accurate meaning/property --- the TT disclosed in the description with existing technical literature i, the equity of i of also known as element X Meaning/property of element X.i compared to/it is opposite.Therefore, these accurate related properties X of element X) .n it is originally determined at D layers The presentation aspect of expressing the meaning of grade replaces, and based on technical staff for the understanding of these terms/express the meaning/disclosure (referring to I.A To I.E chapters and sections).That is: in the case where more sharp attribute and concept (referring to I.D to I.E chapters and sections), the presentation of expressing the meaning of B level It does not need for this to be originally determined, however refines in (sometimes necessary) and may continually need at it.Using ' 884-PTR Example: its TT.p --- in terms of presentation of expressing the meaning of two levels --- is based on 4 technical terms " interchanger ", " network ", " turns Change " and " signal ", it is therefore selected as " the element X " of the TT.p with the attribute being accurately determined in II.B chapters and sections, And there is four reciprocity term/element X.i in any document i/TT.i visibly different meaning to be also known as property, such as II.C chapter It is explained in detail in section.

The D attribute X of 4 X is described in detail in II.A.1.3 chapters and sections) .n (being determined in I.B chapters and sections) and X.i) between .n Relationship --- result is brought together as unclear plcs dependence/pmgp dependence ' 884-D-ANCMatrix.

II.A.1.4 is shown to D-ANCMatrix is to B-ANCMatrix and the plcs of the latter independence/pmgp independence into Row is refined¹⁰⁾。

II.A.1.1Correctly grasp all embodiment supports in relation to attribute of the element X of the TT.p of PTR

Above 16 document i make (sometimes entirely different) meaning different from each other related to their 4 X.i of equity Connection.' 884-D- belowANCMatrix/B-ANCExplanation is practically without X.i to II.C chapters and sections by matrix and II.B) .n is close The X of the equity of TT.p) .n --- however, by the way that they compare with the property of many TT.i, facilitateAccuratelyIt grasps ' many related properties of 884-TT.p, even if they are very different.

As described above, grasping the related properties of the TT.p of PTR and its X of X) .n is that capable field technique personnel is wanted to pass through son Carefully consider that the disclosures of all documents related with TT.p and TT.i are performed important activity (referring to I.A to I.E chapter Section).Here, FSTP analyzer can actually be helped by means of the automatic source language analysis of all documents (that is, by it Be indexed, correspondingly they are marked and/or it is certain it is possible semantically carry out cue marks designs) --- However the final responsibility of the step is usually kept by FSTP user.

Continually, it is impossible to before completing FSTP being subsequently applied to its PTR, accurately and/or fully terminate with The related first parsing activity of the TT.p of patent, this is because following two reason:

■'s and TT.pAccuratelyThe related problem of technical philosophic theory may occur in the case where there: search when at large When the TT.p of rope AC proposes these problems --- because the search carried out by automatic reasoner/prover can be by formal Logic check the chance of the maximum possible for actually finding AC, this for human thinking usual (in both cases) It is impossible --- and

■ very new problem related with TT.p may the generation when document i is added to the RS of PTR, this is mentioned for TT.p The existing chance of the completely immovable AC of secondary AC/ to be altered is supplied¹⁴⁾, that is, it may bring and original existing skill The difference of art RS is not yet simply noted (case in such as II.C.16 chapters and sections) so far.

In short, the technology philosophic theory for correctly grasping TT.p usually requires the processing of height iteration --- to be guaranteed: branch Support following independent claims ' there is no problem for the embodiment of 884-TT.p.It can be started with TT.p, technically It is incomplete or even wrong --- however, therefore it can not be described in detail and inevitably be determined, Because iteration actually reaches duplication check and maximizes Q^plcsAnd Q^pmgpValue, for this purpose, first verifying that its plcs fact/pmgp True plcs independence and pmgp independence.That is:AccuratelyThe FSTP technology trust for grasping the TT.p of PTR " is learned by doing Practise " philosophic theory --- for execute extend PTR FSTP analysis initial stage with accurately obtain it initiated these Alternative is not present in the step of repeating, what the embodiment of TT.p as discussed in this was realized.

II.A.1.2Determine correctly‘Two true examples of the law court to fail very much when 884-TT.p

Described above more than the embodiment to ' 884 TT.p, this section illustrates to those skilled in the art (referring to I.D chapters and sections) absolutely do not need feel immediately to take in good part when having grasped its work for the first time claimed it is special The technical teaching of benefit because it may the appearance when only reading the text of its claim: continue in this simple way into Row has made the Liang Ge law court with extraordinary reputation enter the progress of precedent earlier for opposing them in ' 884 cases The intractable situation of judgement is Bundesgerichtshof in Germany³⁾, the X of BGH^thPanel, and in US, it is Delaware³⁾District Court (two judgement current all in examination).

For " TT.p of the text based on claim " that should be legal in EU, it is necessary to additionally be confirmed for it:

I) which solve by patent specification propose to be solved the problems, such as by its TT.p (EPC 69) and

Ii) it is contradicted in no instance with the specification of this patent (referring to EPC 69), otherwise, the right It is required that explanation --- and the TT.p therefore claimed is illegal and must be removed.

Only these confirmations are so that the TT.p claimed is legal^1),2)--- also, this eliminates and changes/ignore the problem And/or the TT.p is made to solve the problems, such as this some disclosure.

The absolute demand of measurement prevention is finally proved by means of ' 884 demonstrations in the TT.p for determining patent: it is clear Disclose to Chu following real lively difference between the two:

■ is it is initially assumed that the TT.p claimed, due to imposing the limitation of only ' 884 claims to it, and

' 884 ■ legal TT.p, due in addition imposing the above limitation i) and ii to it).

Although the main reason for difference is most of controversial arguements in patent court's case --- it is such to strive It can be grasped at once by technically can be usually simply considered that by non-technical personnel.

In order to be started with showing the lively difference: the English of the claim 1 and 2 of ' 884 patents in col.20 to 21 Text includes 4 element/terms: " exchange ", " packet-switched network ", " change " and " signal ", wherein their meaning is extremely It is limited to less: " ... by data from firstInterchangerIt is sent to secondInterchanger... ", " ... pass throughPacket-switched networkTo data packet Carry out packet-switching transmission ... ", " ... it checks for for sending to and secondInterchangerLine exchange link controlSignal, wherein it shouldSignalSent by the use of terminal device or network management ... ", " ...ChangeIt is claimed for line exchange number defeated ... ".

It can be obtained according to the limitation of these ' 884 claims, ' 884 TT.p claimed are two friendships of any data packet pair It changes planes and line exchange network¹⁸⁾Between data transmission⁶⁾(" process " is omitted generally for succinct) in process.In addition, ' 884 say Bright book has clearly indicated " ' 884 problem " to be solved by ' 884 TT.p: that is, its must be " ... substantially real-time number It is even more important according to transmission ... for the Internet telephone communication ".(col.3:59-62), by ' 884 claims 8 and additionally by As col.2:7-14,3:13-14,3:21-25,4:1-2,7:24-25,8:5-9 is confirmed.

Technical staff immediately recognizes that seldom limitation of the text of ' 884 claims 1 by them there is no guarantee that only limited The data transmission of system it is real-time⁷⁾Quality: that is, it allows " non real-time " data transmission, because the text of claim nowhere forces Its signal being triggered, although, as packet-switched network completely be blocked or two interchangers in one detection Become impossible to using internet⁸⁾.Therefore, such " only ' 884 claims show force/force " claimed ' 884 TT.p are not able to satisfy ' 884 clearly indicated for solving the problems, such as that ' 884 specifications propose¹⁴⁾Legitimate claim, with thick Body printing.

Should " only ' 884 claims show force/it is forced " ' 884 TT.p that are claimed also violate --- due to upper State reason --- two ' the 884 other disclosures how ' 884 TRANSFER work are described in terms of technical detail, That is:

Col.9:37-41: " ... conversion and control equipment 711 ... (a) monitoringTRANSFERBandwidth (b) understep or In the case where delay more than some bandwidth and/or when forwarding IP data packet⁸⁾... withRelease the control order automatically to turn It changes... ",

Col.9:43-52: " in order to become line exchange ... the company that (c) is realized by line crosspoint from packet-switching It connects ...The communication connection consideredAll data to be arrived no longer pass through IP interchanger 72 but by line crosspoint 73 To orient⁸⁾”。

Although should " only ' 884 claims show force/it is forced " ' 884 TT.p that are claimed not according to it is all this The requirement quoted a bit carrys out work --- as preceding paragraph is explained --- however, two of EPC 69 require by legal 's¹⁾' 884 data transmissions/TRANSFER meets and (which solve ' 884 problems and carrys out work according to specified), because its

I) implementation is maintained really⁷⁾Quality (c) --- according to call^14),20)Requirement --- because should TRANSFER²⁰⁾

Ii real-time quality) has been actively generated really keeps convert signals, once it monitors TRANSFER givenly²⁰⁾ (a) --- terminal-to-terminal service occur --- and detect the instruction of following risk: the real-time quality may lose (b).

That is: (a) to (c) is limited above --- in addition to limitation of the text of individual ' 884 claims 1 --- about EPC^1),2), it is compulsory for ' 884 TT.p for wanting legal.It is illegal for ignoring one of those¹⁴⁾。

With the prior art (with " only ' 884 claim limitations forces/force " and therefore illegal/claimed What ' 884 TT.p were indicated) it compares, which is actually to innovate --- and the two TT are technically each other very not Together, anyway --- explained by analogizing: ' 884 legal TT.p are related to institute, (illegal) prior art data institute sound The TT.p of title, as airbag is related to life jacket.' 884 legal TT.p vivo execute above step i) to ii), as airbag Oneself automatically generate at least 0.5 second release signal vivo after having been detected by shock risk to inflate --- that is, even if Do not hit later --- however " only ' 884 claims limitation based on "/illegal it is claimed ' 884 TT.p --- as life jacket --- oneself will not automatically generate release signal to inflate/change, however, its user must generate Its (according to his judgement and according to his/her reasonable consideration), never risks its unnecessary risk, that is, only or even After emergency actually has already appeared.

It is last in II.A.1.1 to II.A.1.2: correctly and fully to grasp and present the institute of the TT.p in PTR analysis Property --- but regardless of them being presented or be formalized with natural language (referring to the decline of I.C chapters and sections) --- is no It only in the FSTP analysis of PTR, and is all big problem in any kind of legal analysis of PTR, that is, usual at it / traditional analysis in be also big problem.Although it is assumed that PTR FSTP analysis can guarantee avoid it is mistakenly and/or endless It may be big misunderstanding that its TT.p is presented entirely, however, FSTP analysis substantially contributes to user and actually avoids to TT.p's Any misrepresentation: that is, FSTP method forces the correlation and integrality of his/her property of duplication check TT.p many times --- It is referred to as inevitable period (referring to the last paragraph of II.A.1.1 chapters and sections) in many initial repetitive processes, however, by it When forming the presentation of the B level of redundancy of PTR problem¹⁴⁾, it is introduced so that and is able to carry out duplication check (wherein) --- The non-detection of one of these properties/" remaining " misrepresentation is very impossible (it is assumed that being worked in an orderly manner).

II.A.1.3 The determination of FSTP analyst's embodiment of the D-ANC matrix of PTR --- it is illustrated with ' 884 PTR

(referring to above-mentioned paragraph) since the formal fact/informal fact on the technical basis provided in this way, FSTP, its user can automatically determine the technical formal main fact of PTR, that is, its D-ANCMatrix.

Such as, as shown in II.A.1.2 chapters and sections, the text of ' 884 independent claims uses 4 --- fairly frequently make In the communication technology --- crucial term/element, A≤X≤D.That is: " interchanger " (X=A), " network " (X=B), " change Become " (X=C) and " control signal " (X=D).These 4 ' the accurate property of 884 elements/term such as ' 884 patents institute is public Open --- and as technical staff in view of the prior art understood (about their correlation, referring to I.A.5 chapter Section) --- pass through the D attribute X defined in II.B chapters and sections) .n describes, wherein A≤X≤D, n=1,2,3 ....

' 884 D attribute X are also known as to the meanings of these 15 technical brass tacks in order to provide) .n it is initial fast The general introduction of speed, very vaguely/endless site preparation provides them as follows:

■ D-A) .1, as " the common data transmission between 2 ' 884 interchangers and variation at ' 884 signals (DT) " attribute is exchanged,

■ D-A) .2, attribute is exchanged as " possible mistake/loss of real-time DT mass ",

■ D-A) .3, as " only the variation of the communication connection and during call setup " exchange attribute,

■ D-A) .4, attribute is exchanged as " direct-dial telephone connection possibility ",

■ D-A) .5, as " by call setup by packet-switched network (PSN) realize calling DT whenever Beginning " exchange attribute,

■ D-A) .6, attribute is exchanged as " permanent/different access and line exchange network (LSN) to PSN ",

■ D-B) .1, as " including any addressable LSN and PSN to " network attribute,

■ D-C) .1, as " independently of PSN LSN connection foundation be possible " change to attributes,

■ D-C) .2, as " be transferred from again by user data PSN transmission be possible " change to attributes,

■ D-C) .3, as " delay≤0.5 second be possible " change to attributes,

■ D-C) .4, as the Initial Consistency of required PSN DT " not be used for " change to attributes,

■ D-C) .5, as " the not consistency later for LSN DT required for becoming " change to attributes,

■ D-D) .1, as "+2 generational verctors of external source or inside sources+many generational verctors " signal attribute,

■ D-D) .2, as " from the triggering for the transformation for disobeying the non-accessibility of LSN " signal attribute,

■ D-D) .3, as " from the triggering for the transformation for disobeying any user information or confirmation " signal attribute.

Accurate D-X) .n these outlines when used in express the meaning and show following property/meaning, by itself and term The associated those skilled in the art of A-D include more based on the information of technical ability than the layman being associated.

Informal result/formal the result for rearranging II.B and II.C has obtained D-ANCMatrix³⁾。

In ' 884 cases, the attribute X.i of document i) .n (referring to II.C chapters and sections) do not need completely to describe, because of telecommunications The technical staff in field can directly determine wherein which D- according to the disclosure of document iANCPair of the relationship for them Deng X) .n set up.Otherwise, X.i completely and can be described formally) .n, as X) .n --- again: both is such as technology people As member understands in view of the prior art (about its correlation, referring to I.A.5 chapters and sections) --- so that FSTP can be automatic Determine D-ANCMatrix.

The D-ANCMatrix shows 15 ' 884 attribute D-X by 16 existing technical literatures) .n these

■Only 4 provide opinion by document i, that is, only 4 are arranged, there are i, wherein " D-X.i) .nants D-X) .n ",

■11 D-X) .n is absolutely not presented opinion ⁹⁾, that is, for 11 column and all i, " D-X.i) .nnot-antsD-X) .n " is set up,

■At least 7 D-X in each document i) .n contradicts, that is, for any i, at least exist 7 " D-X.i) .n contradict D-X).n”。

Therefore, seem to provide ' 884 with ' 884 technical main this related 3 row of the fact in D level TT.p compared with the existing technology (with ' and 884RS expression) unobviousness first indicate --- however, not referring to so far Content related with the independence of D concept.B-ANCMatrix shows the expression therefore is not yet conclusive.

Finally, suitably being commented on the admissibility in the present context using formal attribute, such as by SFTP skill What art was practiced.Accurately it is presented the TT.p and its TT.i of PTR by using formal attribute, i.e. their term contains Justice --- be in Patent Law context so far it is unique, describe PTR essence when do not practice the accuracy --- by such as The transitivity legal logic of lower form is legalized without restriction:

" if following formula is set up: AndC.i relates_somehow_toThen following formula is also set up: C.i relates_somehow_to”。

Here, 15 ' 884 formal propertiesEach of logically be equal to its ' 884 disclosure of natural language/figure Content,Generally corresponding " informal ' 884 attribute " (referring to II.B chapters and sections).Therefore,

If C.i is indicatedInclude document i in each natural language/figure disclosure equity it is " informal Document i attribute ".II.C chapters and sections determine informal attribute C.i and formal attributeBetween D-ANCRelationship.Therefore, because Above-mentioned transitivity law, identical D-ANCRelationship is in natural language/figure document i disclosure C.i and natural language/figure ' 884 disclosuresBetween similarly set up.

In other words: natural language/figure disclosure of the formal attribute from the equity in above-mentioned document i (1≤i≤16) With the D- between ' 884 patentsANCCan be removed in relationship --- that is, not influencing the D- between themANCRelationship.To D-ANCMatrix Supplemented, so that D-X is also shown in it) basic original natural language/figure disclosure of .n, also, D-X.i) .n Can require nothing more than by each of which addition tower make its become 3 dimension, that is, to 15 such towers of each row, that is, pass through to It is familiar with each D-X for 15 formal ' 884) the corresponding tower of each addition its ' 884 disclosure of natural language/figure in .n, And same tower is applied to 15 D-X.i formal in each of 16 document i) each of .n.

15 ' 884-D attributes(and they involved in concepts) is by compactification and by its natural language/figure The bulk information " be described in detail to technical detail " of the disclosure of the TT.i of shape and not only generate to the more accurate of ' 884 TT.p Understanding, moreover, they establish unique frame of reference for all of which: about ' 884 patent of determination natural language/ Above-mentioned D- between the disclosure of figure and 16 document iANCRelationship, or even more importantly B attribute.

II.A.1.4 The determination of FSTP analyst's embodiment of the B-ANC matrix of PTR --- it is illustrated with ' 884 PTR

In D level, it may be difficult to point out the D- of PTRANCWhether whether matrix be complete and independently of plcs/ Pmgp (referring to I.A.5 and I.B.1 chapters and sections).Therefore, FSTP analysis requires to be presented in B level, therefore, not only increases For its identification attribute/property integrality a possibility that, and also increase evaluation B-ANCThe plcs independence of matrix With the ability of pmgp independence.

In other words: although D attribute/property 1-cM of the prior art, support they invention idea¹⁰⁾D level Through existing, however, the plcs independence of these ideas/pmgp independence --- required by precedent --- may be difficult to prove, Because of the usually shared D concept of D attribute.It is expected that B level is able to solve the problem.

The set of such plcs independence/pmgp independence and even binary system B attribute/concept are directed to ' 884-PTR It can directly obtain¹⁰⁾--- in other cases, this may be more difficult¹⁴⁾.Note that B attribute/concept set is usually not only One, that is, there may be the B of alternative attribute/concepts¹⁴⁾。

‘884 D-ANCThe generalities of matrix replace 15 D-X with combining for 28 B-X) .n) .n.Wherein, 4 D-X) .n --- A that need " notional decomposition ") .1, A) .2, D) .2 and D) .3 --- it is replaced with combining for 17 B-X) .n. 2 B level attributes of such as: attribute D) .2 (referring to II.B chapters and sections), i.e., " if C.23=Y and C.24=Y, D) .2=Y ", comes Instead of.These 4 D-X) .n is broken down into several B-C.k, such as B-ANCIt is emphasized in matrix with thick horizontal line.Other 11 A D-X) .n replaces with corresponding 11 B attribute/B concept B-X) .12 to B-X) .22.

B-ANCMatrix shows 28 ' 884 attribute B-X by 16 existing technical literatures) .k

■Only 19 provide opinion by document i, that is, only 19 are arranged, there are some i, wherein " B-X.i) .kants B-X) .k ",

■9 B-X) .k is absolutely not presented opinion ⁹⁾, that is, for k=1,7,13,14,18,19,22,23,25 and All i, " B-X.i) .knot-antsB-X) .k " is set up,

■At least 9 B-X in each document i) .k contradicts, that is, for any i, at least exist 9 " B-X.i) .k contradict B-X).k”。

This indicate --- as the ending of II.A.2 chapters and sections by 3 side point be explained in detail --- with by means of D-ANCMatrix --- it is sometimes even problematic --- Lai Zhihang, if by means of B-ANCMatrix is analyzed come FSTP when executing Increased importance.

The 2nd FSTP fact of II.A.2 determines the stage --- it is illustrated with ' 884 PTR

By explaining that it is supporting the D- from PTRANCMatrix/B-ANCMatrix obtains its technical secondary basis It works in real time with the plcs-D fact/plcs-B thing, for technical staff, illustrates the second true determining rank of FSTP analyzer The embodiment of section.

Not all steps of the acquirement are all relevant for the FSTP patent application.As being presented to B layers in D level In the case where the transformation for the PTR problem that grade is presented, II.A.1.4 chapters and sections are had highlighted that, in B level,

The disclosure of ■ other hint is stimulated by the technical skills of the technology fact, and the technology fact is in FSTP The fact that analyzer, is considered into determining.That is: the B of above 4 elements expresses the meaning/and meaning is not only their D and expresses the meaning/meaning Refine, and --- in order to clarify Independence undetermined --- B expresses the meaning/meaning passes through other " lower-level " skill The disclosure of the technical ability of art feature specifically implied based on PTR, semantically, " abundant " these D express the meaning/meaning.This makes Their D can be expressed the meaning/meaning is transformed into binary system B attribute/concept joint.

■ is to B-ANCThe plcs independence and pmgp independence of matrix¹⁴⁾Evaluation can be by FSTP user¹⁰⁾To execute And/or being executed automatically by FSTP analyzer --- both of which is to FSTP patent application there is no suggestion that (therefore being not required to To be considered by the embodiment of FSTP analyzer).

II.A.2.1Technical secondary brass tacks is determined in D level/B level——Basic FSTP test

The fact that be in D level/B level by being determined with the FSTP of second level " test " in lower frame.That is: exist This provides " FSTP of first foundation is tested " only for completion.Their text is slightly suitble to ' 884 cases.

Two tests all monitor the precedent of the Supreme Judicial Court (referring to I.F chapters and sections).Second basic FSTP test shows first one It sees in ' 884 D-ANCMatrix/B-ANCFree 0-AC, needless to say element direction and/or no contradiction are not present at matrix 0-AC¹⁴⁾.That is: the technical secondary basic D fact/B fact determination of ' 884 PTR is unessential.

More accurately, by the second basis FSTP test application in ' 884D-ANCMatrix/B-ANCMatrix is for ' 884 technologies On secondary brass tacks, show: for normally be expected relationship, q=∞/∞, because two matrixes do not include removing Other D elements --- that is, all D attributes, B attribute/concept --- other than (4 D elements A-D) B are by D layers single Grade 0-AC or B level 0-AC is expected¹³⁾.And even in the case where being freely expected relationship (any NPS does not allow), The q value of the technical secondary brass tacks of ' 884 PTR is still ∞/∞ in two levels¹⁴⁾。

II.A.2.2Determine that technical secondary semanteme is true and creativeness is true in B level——Sufficient FSTP is surveyed Examination

For the rest part of II.A, D level is not just so important, this is because its explained above various is asked Topic.In addition, in the technical secondary B fact of ' 884 PTR, only its Q^plcsValue/Q^pmgpValue is obtained and discusses --- that is,It is allMost short Q^plcsPath/Q^pmgpThe automatic confirmable set in path lies on the table --- and it is from ' the combined B- of 884RS Hull starts the lower bound of the quantity of independent idea required for inventing ' 884 TT.p^14),10).Therefore, FSTP analyzer passes through weight Determine the quantity (referring to I.F in B level using the possible precedent with the related Germany BGH that expresses the meaning of independent idea again Chapters and sections).

The application --- due to its complexity inwardly --- is accurately repeated not analyze by FSTP actually Term/express the meaning forced PTR problem accuracy and it is formalized in the case where be impossible.It is not using only natural language No more⁵⁾: in legal case being clearly defined but complicated, any natural language meets the requirement of many mankind, But without meeting the true requirement for determining problem.That is, its by PTR problem be transformed into for there are q-AC the case where determine it is independent 1-cM minimum number q restriction detailed search problem¹⁴⁾。

In ' 884 cases, the finite aggregate of all AC, RS⁺, including 16⁴A four times of (that is, 65 536), this is because first Element^14).B<A.i, B.j, C.k, D.l>all combinations, wherein 1≤I, j, k, l≤16, attribute can be combined in expected group It closes in AC.Any four times also known as four times of components of AC include that 6/1/5/3 --- 15/1/5/7 --- supports D-ANCMatrix/B-ANC D attribute/B attribute tupel of the item of matrix.

FSTP analyzer can be determined by the limited detailed inspection to all AC --- it can be in D-ANCMatrix/ B-ANCDirection in matrix along column come tissue which and/or check and not all combination or its four times or its attribute and/ Or it only partially checks at least one combination or four times or attribute and/or is traversing RS⁺The other efficiency shortcuts of Shi Yingyong ---

If the normal plcs option of ■^14).A/B/CIt is assumed pmgp, then RS⁺In be completely absent AC, that is, Q^pmgp= ∞。

If only element integrity protection plcs option is assumed pmgp to ■^14).B/C, then combine < A.6, B.6, C.6, D.2 > four times of available Q of B attribute^pmgp=17 value --- it proves, it is contemplated that it is expected that ' 884 TT.p, ' 884 prior arts At least 17 independent 1-cM be inevitably used for the shortage of RS being reduced to " 0 "¹⁰⁾.That is, for this purpose, minimal needing at least 17 independent notional modifications are also known as the 1-cM of the prior art, therefore, 17 independent ideas¹⁰⁾Produce these 17 1- CM, so that TT.p passes through RS⁺/ mod (17-cM) is expected¹⁴⁾.Wherein, which is defined as --- (A.6, B.6, in four times of the specific B attribute C.6, D.2), i.e., relative to B-ANCIn the specific AC of matrix --- it will be any N phase or C phase become A.

If the free plcs option of ■ is assumed pmgp^14).C, then the minimum value of q is still equal to 9 --- it indicates at 16 In any of existing technical literature i without open ' 884 concept of at least nine (or even without by its exclusion/with It is contradicted) --- however, the pmgp of NPS does not allow by Q^pmgp- AC is combined the flexibility of aspect¹⁴⁾。

End, it is noted that the example of the work of FSTP analyzer embodiment explains important phenomenon: why technology is asked The afterlight of topic claims that apparent solution is unobvious by the prior art.That is, the secondary technical wound of PTR New sexual behavior is shown in fact, therefore, invent the TT.p actually it should be appreciated that the technical entire modification of the prior art (herein Are as follows: at least 17 independent 1-cM¹⁰⁾), although these modifications are not completely attractive, because (that is, these 17 independently of plcs Sum independently of pmgp 1-dM) any of them individual one look like such " imperceptible ", " technically not It is common ", " unessential ", and simultaneously, and " extremely complex and expensive in terms of technology understanding ".In ' 884 cases, Be blocked many years, the technical determination that recognizes them, uncomfortable negligible coalescence, it is mutual for meeting The duration of networking telephonic communication is independent for needing --- that is, these seem the negligible of edge.

II.BDetermine the D attribute of ' 884 TT.p

As described in the beginning of II.A chapters and sections, here, in ' 884 patent specifications and claims, ' 884 15 D attribute X of 4 ' 884 elements of TT.p (that is, ' 884 claim to a method)) .n is by identifying their natural language They are transformed into these to determine by ' 884 disclosure of speech/figure (=technical basic the informal fact) More accurate " formal " ' 884 attributes.In order to efficient, then, only to the identification of ' 884 disclosure of natural language/figure Each reference occurs, their D concept is not commented on¹⁸⁾, and also eliminate these informal disclosures be known as this The other intermediate stage of any transformation of a little 15 ' 884 formal attributes.Note that these formal attributes are to identify in this way Related disclosure during many iteration result, that is, repeatedly refine them again.

The subsequent definition to 15 ' 884 D attributes as these duplicate results --- including they to clear And implicit D disclosure¹⁾Reference --- be presented in unique scheme comprising reappear sentence fragment and referred to as it is expected It indicates:

■ is followed by the reference to ' 884 disclosures for proving it to the definition (runic) of ' 884 D attributes.

■ passes through " CsoD-X) .n ... " (result of Cso=) --- this referred to as indicate " D-X.i) .nnot-ants D- X) .n " or even " D-X.i) .ncontradictsD-X) (=" naoc ", both of which are true in II.C.i chapters and sections by .n " It is fixed) --- at least one condition and/or D-X.i) .n is given, the disclosure in document i, in the two relationships at least First establishment.

■ " II.C.i " row identification discloses such " naock " D-X.i) the document i of .n, as institute is really in II.C.i chapters and sections Fixed.

Finally, with regard to BGH precedent: ' 884 TT.p will be used to explain ' 884 claims.This is indicated, for all ' 884 elements, limitation application, be it is independent, with realize Internet Protocol telephone communication data transmission real-time quality (such as Disclosed in ' 884 specifications, referring to II.A.1.2 chapters and sections).

D-A).1' 884 " interchanger " attribute status: " the first interchanger be generally positioned at its user's line before < or it Afterwards, be ignored herein >, and the data transmission known into the communication connection of second switch considered, and execute Usually from packet-switched network to the first of line exchange network the transformation, however, and if only if ' 884 signals are detected To and line exchange link be available and be established, wherein the detection can occur at any time ".

For the example in the claim 1 and 2 of ' 884 patents and ' 884 signals in col.9:23-41, disclose ' 884 " interchanger " attribute D-A) .1.

CsoD-A) .1, if in document i, " second switch ", " data transmission in communication connection considered ", " detect ' transformation in the case where 884 signal " and/or " packet-switched network " be not with it or contradict (=" naoc ").

II.C.iShow: for all document i, 1≤i≤16, CsoD-A) .1 establishment.

D-A).2" in the case where the loss of the real-time quality of threat data transmission, the first interchanger automatically trigger It is transformed into line exchange transmission from packet-switching ".

As disclosed D-A in the claim 8 of col.9:23-52 and ' 884 specifications) .2, referring to II.A.1.2 chapters and sections.

CsoD-A) .2, if in document i being the variation for fetching triggering by the communication link considered, if it meets The condition of II.A.1.2 chapters and sections, and/or be more than some noise grade at second switch.

II.C.iShow: for all document i, 1≤i≤16, CsoD-A) .2 establishment.

D-A).3" the first interchanger being capable of opening in the data transmission of the packet-switching for the communication connection that it is considered Begin, and change in the case where the data transmission, and under no interruption communication connection state, and is only individually touched by it Hair ".

' 884 claims 1,2,8,10,11 and such as col.3:15-19,3:57-62,7:18-26,9:23-52 and 11: D-A is disclosed in 33-39 (Fig. 5 a)) .3.

CsoD-A) if .3 is naoc in document i: packet-switched network and/or the transformation can be handed in its data The beginning for the data transmission changed and/or in the case where the data transmission and/or no interruption communication connection in the case where go out It is only triggered now and/or individually by it.

II.C.iShow: for all document i, 1≤i≤16, CsoD-A) .3 establishment.

D-A).4: " the first interchanger has the interface for connecting at least one ISDN or simulation or mobile phone ".

CsoD-A) if .4 is naoc: the connection possibility of such phone in document i.

II.C.iShow: for all document i, 1≤i≤16, CsoD-A) .4 establishment.

D-A).5: " the first interchanger, which usually passes through, to be started call foundation or is usually connected by establishing real time communication It connects¹⁷⁾To start the data transmission of considered packet-switching ".

D-A is disclosed by col.9:8-10) .5: this disclosure describe ' 884 data transmissions to pass through packet-switching Start.That is: there is no the data transmissions of the packet-switching of the call for the foundation prior to starting call, that is, It starts in the case where call setup or in the case where communicating to connect and establishing.

CsoD-A data for calling) must be started in the case where certain different thing if .5 is in document i Transmission is e.g. establishing network connection for the first time or is V.120 connecting or request access to¹⁹⁾Or in the case where being naoc: phone is exhaled It cries and/or packet-switched network.

II.C.iShow: for all document i, 1≤i≤16, CsoD-A) .5 establishment.

D-A).6: " if the first interchanger --- it is not a part of network, referring to the above D-A) .1 --- have extremely Line exchange network and permanent entrance to packet-switched network ".

' 884 claims 1 and 2 disclose D-A) .6 --- exchange of the two claims for them passes through right It is required that dialing switched line on the line exchange network in 1 and passing through the permanent line in claim 2 --- and The disclosure of the disclosure of Fig. 1 in col.7:49-52 and Fig. 4 a to Fig. 4 j in col.8:34-52,9:42-52 (be respectively IP interchanger 72 and line switching equipment 73, both shows two of two Web portals for them A individual line), it provides to line exchange network and to the permanent entrance of packet-switched network.

CsoD-A) if .6 only discloses a Web portal for accessing two functions of exchange in document i, such as ISDN and the case where other " integrated " networks or naoc: random access details and/or packet-switched network.

II.C.iShow: for all document i, 1≤i≤16, CsoD-A) .6 establishment.

D-B).1: " any combination that ' 884 TT.p can be applied to data packet and line exchange network ".

CsoD-B) if .1 only disclosed in document i single ISDN (but not there are two network, line exchange network and Packet-switched network), perhaps only disclose other single integrated network or basic without disclosing arbitrary data packet friendship Switching network, or without disclosing being widely applied for its invention for such combination of network.

II.C.iShow: for all document i, i ≠ 3 or 6, CsoD-B) .1 establishment.

D-C).1: " line exchanges establishment of connection independently of packet-switched network ".

D-C is disclosed in ' 884 specifications by line switching equipment 73) .1, col.8:47-50.It includes number coupling 731, it needs for come exchanging telephone channel, and establishing by line exchange network and exchanging connection, Huo Zhezuo for the line of variation For " new " ISDN/PSTN connection, or by carrying out multiplex/demultiplex to it, in existing ISDN/PSDN connection, col.10:56-63,11:18-23.In both cases, it is not contacted with packet-switched network.

CsoD-C) .1, if in document i, it is assumed that total failure of packet-switched network make it impossible to establish Line exchange connects (such as in ISDN perhaps MUMTS) or if it is impossible that this, which passes through design, no matter data packet is handed over The switching network function that there is no problem.

II.C.iShow: for all document i, i ≠ 6, CsoD-C) .1 establishment.

D-C).2: " at least part of user data transmission occurs without transmitting again ".

It may be adapted to Internet Protocol telephone communication by ' 884 data transmissions of description such as in col.3:61-62 and disclose D- C) .2, wherein col7:1 and 8:39 discloses the purposes of UDP for this purpose.Meet the voice letter that the requirement avoids transmission Number --- comprising remaining dislocation --- being redelivered --- therefore in addition having distorted it, especially in its compressed situation Under, col2:9-10,8:39-46.

CsoD-C) .2, if each user data transports through X.25 or TCP or other residue in document i Dislocation and/or data-bag lost avoid agreement, occur on packet-switched network (because these evitable situations are usual Data packet involved in " again transmit " and so that data transmission is unsuitable for telephonic communication) --- it does not have in such as UDP In the case where being disclosed for internet data transmission (but nearly TCP), or only when the channel ISDN-D is used for user data, Or only establishment (as these are usually using such " all remaining mistakes avoid " agreement) when " data network " is conceived to.

II.C.iShow: for all document i, 1≤i≤16, CsoD-C) .2 establishment.

D-C).3: " delay≤0.5 second of the data transmission of communication connection ".

D-C is disclosed in col.2:10 and 7:11-12) .3.

CsoD-C) if .3 is naoc in document i: the data transmission or its upper limit are up to delay in 0.5 second.

II.C.iShow: for all document i, 1≤i≤16, CsoD-C) .3 establishment.

D-C) .4 and D-C) .5: " without situation require the first interchanger by packet-switched network realize and network or The consistency of second switch or its user

D-C).4: be initially used in start send telephone call data or

D-C).5: at any time for starting conversion or line exchange data transmission, if there is ' 884 signals ".

D-C is disclosed by claim 1 and 2) .4 and D-C) .5, two claims enable the first interchanger single Aspect (that is, not havingPass through packet-switched networkRealize any kind of consistency) start at any time to call The second switch of specific data, the packet-switching transmission to the latter, if there is only ' 884 signals, until line exchanges number According to the conversion of transmission.

CsoD-C) .4&CsoD-C) if .5 in document i prior to starting call, the first interchanger must pass through number The consistency with network or with second switch or its user is realized according to packet network --- use the packet-switching of ISDN The case where function, is identical, alternatively, V.120 connecting in the case where initially setting up, or to mobile data packet network Access initial request in the case where.

II.C.iShow: for all document i, i ≠ 6 and ≠ 5, CsoD-C) .4&CsoD-C) .5 establishment.

D-D).1: " ' 884 signals can only have and usually have at least one of 3 alternative source/reasons: its

■ is sent to the first interchanger by following,

The zero other interchanger triggered by network management, or

Zero by its user come the terminal of communication connection triggering, being considered,

■ by the first interchanger and is only automatically generated by its data transmission¹⁹⁾--- otherwise, it is not ' 884 signals ".

As disclosed D-D discussed in the II.A.1.2 chapters and sections) .1.

CsoD-D) .1, if signal has other other than one in these origin/reasons in document i Origin/reason, or can not have one in these origin/reasons.Because disclosure expression can generate ' 884 The reason of place to<origin of signal, generation>list in detail certainly --- then any place to<origin= The reason of host, generation=application > be performed from generating ' 884 signals.

II.C.iShow: for all document i, 1≤i≤16, CsoD-D) .1 establishment.

D-D).2: " and if only if signal has D-D) .1 property, which starts to change, also, therefore, It is never invalid, this is because the non-accessibility of line exchange network --- it is not ' 884 signals otherwise ".

CsoD-D) .2, if in document i, signal or triggered by application/host or by first interchanger itself and It is non-according to II.A.1.2 chapters and sections and/or if it can be refused by anyone or anything.

II.C.iShow: for all document i, 1≤i≤16, CsoD-D) .2 establishment.

D-D).3: " (especially, first ' 884 signals can be sent to when second switch starts in packet switched data In anything is sent to by the network by the first interchanger, to the latter) generate, and at least handed over by user or first It changes planes in the case where generation, validity is limited to considered communication connection, and does not need anyone confirmation to become to have Effect, and require no knowledge about the knowledge of user --- otherwise it is not ' 884 signals ".

D-D is disclosed in claim 1 and 2) .3 (referring to II.A.1.2 chapters and sections).

CsoD-D) .3, if in document i, convert signals cannot by the first interchanger for the first time by data packet Exchange data transmission to generating (this expression: or even prior to anything is sent to the latter, to should after second switch at once Network), either its validity --- by user or the generation of the first interchanger --- cannot be only limitted to institute The data transmission of the communication connection of consideration requires someone to confirm perhaps to become effectively or must be known by the knowledge of user.

II.C.iShow: for all document i, 1≤i≤16, CsoD-D) .3 establishment.

Note that no one of these advanced 15 D attributes are well known prior to ' 884 TT.p of invention¹⁰⁾.This confirmation 15 D attributes of TT.p are not well known at that time, in addition, impossible be, being done by afterlight can carry out now Anything: that is, execute at large search be limited to technology TT.i property combined minimum number 1-cM so that should The combination of changeantsTT.p.Note that even current, the minimum plcs high by search ' 884 relative to its prior art RS This of degree progress watches analysis backward --- by for inventing the independent idea for suitably changing the 1-cM of the prior art¹⁰⁾'s Quantity measures --- and it must pass through the technical ability of telecommunication technology to confirm, by it be to belong to/express the meaning original already lead to due to it Many puzzlements: it them has been directed to establishes international agreement²⁰⁾。

However, therefore, these technical ability determine ' 884D attribute must be refined into what even more PTR problems generated ' for 884B attribute --- it confirms again by related technical ability --- to access, independence requirement is by determined above ' 884 TT.p of creation D-Q^plcsIdea/B-Q^plcsIdea meets¹⁰⁾。

The D/B-ANC relationship of 884 PTR of II.C ' i.e. its ' 884 D/B-ANC matrix --- " manually " determines

Following II.C.i chapters and sections " manually " (that is, by author, rather than FSTP analyzer) determine²⁰⁾It is used for 16 document i Each of and for it in relation to any of natural language disclosure --- that is, be used for and D-X) .n equity this article Offer 15 D-X.i of i) .n --- D level --- itsnot-antsStill evencontradictsD-X) (this has been determined .n D-ANCThe item A or N or C of matrix).Manually determine B-ANCThe item of matrix is identical with this, however even more complicated, and therefore It is omitted herein in order to succinct.

Hereinafter, these will be describedANCStatement, is later its main reason --- unless these are unessential.? The abbreviation that the beginning of II.B chapters and sections is introduced/be referred to as also applied to hereinafter, and abbreviation " referring to CsoD-X) .n " permanently made With.

II.C.1 FARESE- document .1/NK 13

Farese discloses the dynamic change of ISDN " access channel " --- and Fig. 4 a's to Fig. 4 j and Fig. 5 a to Fig. 5 b passes through The client terminal 10 (=the first interchanger claimed) and host computer side 80 (second switch claimed) of isdn switch 35 Between --- during " host session " that runs on access channel, line exchanges B channel and connect it with packet-switching D channel Between, it is controlled by the instruction of " host " in the session, to correspond to corresponding " communication of session needs ", col.6:61- 7:10.Its single network is ISDN.

According to the disclosure of document 1, following 15 kinds " not-ants "/" contradicts " relationship is obtained:

D-A.1) .1 not-ants D-A) .1: referring to CsoD-A) .1 and CsoD-D) .1 or CsoD-D) .2 or CsoD- D).3 (N)

D-A.1) .2 not-ants D-A) .2: referring to CsoD-A) .2 (N)

D-A.1) .3 contradicts D-A) .3:Farese discloses his terminal 10 and can only have built up Fig. 4 a in --- that is, not while establishing its --- change during host session, col.8:66-9:2 and 9:7-10 is extremely Fig. 4 j or their main description. (C)

D-A.1) .4 not-ants D-A) .4: terminal 10 does not disclose any phone connectivity.(N)

D-A.1) .5 contradicts D-A) .5: referring to CsoD-A) .5 (C)

D-A.1) .6 contradicts D-A) .6: referring to CsoD-A) .6 (C)

D-B.1) .1 contradicts D-B) .1: referring to CsoD-B) .1 (C)

D-C.1) .1 contradicts D-C) .1: referring to CsoD-C) .1 (C)

D-C.1) .2 contradicts D-C) .2: referring to CsoD-C) .2 (C)

D-C.1) .3 not-ants D-C) .3: referring to CsoD-C) .3 (N)

D-C.1) .4 contradicts D-C) .4: referring to CsoD-C) .4 (C)

D-C.1) .5 contradicts D-C) .5: referring to CsoD-C) .5, due to establish line exchange " access path " according to Rely the consistency in second switch, to use V.120 agreement (in addition), referring to Fig. 6,607-685 row (C)

D-D.1) .1 contradicts D-D) .1: referring to CsoD-D) .1 (C)

D-D.1) .2 contradicts D-D) .2: referring to CsoD-D) .2 (C)

D-D.1) .3 contradicts D-D) .3: referring to CsoD-D) .3 (C)

II.C.2 YOSHIDA- document .2/NK 14

Yoshida is disclosed " system for accessing the ISDN from data packet handling system ", col.1:11-12 --- That is, " ISDN terminal branch orchestration " (including all devices between " the LAN NT 16 " and " ISDN.NT 13 " in Fig. 1) --- its In, formation system realizes the transmission of the data packet " to so-called entity " from latter system, as " channel variation is believed Number " reaction of (being generated due to the increase by latter system's packet rate generated), from using packet-switching " virtual Circuit ", which is changed to, exchanges " virtual circuit " using the line of ISDN, therefore the transmission without interrupting data packet, col.2:9-14 are plucked It wants.Its individual network is: ISDN.

According to the disclosure of document 2, following 15 kinds " not-ants "/" contradicts " relationship is obtained:

D-A.2) .1 not-ants D-A) .1: referring to CsoD-A) .1 (N)

D-A.2) .2 not-ants D-A) .2: referring to CsoD-A) .2 (N)

D-A.2) .3 contradicts D-A) .3: referring to CsoD-A) .3, due to Yoshida (C)

■ discloses it by means of Fig. 3 a to Fig. 3 b and col.5:22-26 and generally includes all communication connections in variation And furthermore and its data transmission --- being realized by means of virtual circuit ---

■ discloses its variation by means of col.5:27-64 and cannot carry out during connecting foundation until its " control channel " connection confirmation signal " has been received in processor 27 ".

D-A.2) .4 contradicts D-A) .4:Yoshida eliminates any non-IP phone connectivity (N)

D-A.2) .5 contradicts D-A) .5: referring to CsoD-A.2) .5 (C)

D-A.2) .6 contradicts D-A) .6: referring to CsoD-A) .6 (C)

D-B.2) .1 contradicts D-B) .1: referring to CsoD-B) .1 (C)

D-C.2) .1 contradicts D-C) .1: referring to CsoD-C) .1 (C)

D-C.2) .2 contradicts D-C) .2: referring to CsoD-C) .2 (C)

D-C.2) .3 not-ants D-C) .3: referring to CsoD-C) .3 (N)

D-C.2) .4 contradicts D-C) .4: referring to CsoD-C) .4 (C)

D-C.2) .5 contradicts D-C) .5: referring to CsoD-C) .5 (C)

D-D.2) .1 contradicts D-D) .1: referring to CsoD-D) .1, since the signal of variation is only by " channel change Device 29 " is carried out, col.6:61-66 (N) automatically to trigger by unknown reason

D-D.2) .2 contradicts D-D) .2: referring to CsoD-D) .2, and due to entering in CsoD-D.2) in .1 (N)

D-D.2) .3 contradicts D-D) .3: referring to CsoD-D) .3. (C)

II.C.3 LUCENT- document .3/NK 22

Disclosure of 14 kinds " not-ants "/" contradicts " relationship from document 3 below:

D-A.3) .1 not-ants D-A) .1: referring to CsoD-A) .1 (N)

D-A.3) .2 not-ants D-A) .2: referring to CsoD-A) .2 (N)

D-A.3) .3 contradicts D-A) .3: referring to CsoD-A) .3 (C)

D-A.3) .4 not-ants D-A) .4: referring to CsoD-A) .4 (N)

D-A.3) .5 contradicts D-A) .5: referring to CsoD-A) .5 (C)

D-A.3) .6 not-ants D-A) .6: referring to CsoD-A) .6 (N)

D-C.3) .1 contradicts D-C) .1: referring to CsoD-C) .1 (C)

D-C.3) .2 not-ants D-C) .2: referring to CsoD-C) .2 (N)

D-C.3) .3 contradicts D-C) .3: referring to CsoD-C) .3 (C)

D-C.3) .4 contradicts D-C) .4: referring to CsoD-C) .4 (C)

D-C.3) .5 not-ants D-C) .5: referring to CsoD-C) .5 (N)

D-D.3) .1 contradicts D-D) .1: referring to CsoD-D) .1 (C)

D-D.3) .2 not-ants D-D) .2: referring to CsoD-D) .2 (N)

D-D.3) .3 contradicts D-D) .3: referring to CsoD-D) .3 (C)

II.C.4 TADAMURA- document .4/NK 23

The content of document 4 is consistent with document 12/NK37, as analyzed in II.C.7 chapters and sections.

II.C.5 MATUSKAWA- document .5/NK 24a

Matuskawa discloses " isdn terminal adapter 1 " (such as Fig. 1 or claim 1), according to its " timer 14 " As a result, will description packet switched data transmission in the case where " unresponsive " and " delayed data " " transmit DTE 2 number According to communication " line interchange code is automatically switched to from packet-switching, (such as col.1:<claim 1>or col.2:<0013> Or col.3:<0018>, second).Note that timer 14 is according to col.3: 3 data packet DTE to DTE of<0019>measurement layer delivering The time of confirmation.Such data packet is not ' 884 terminals of ' 884 communication connections considered completely to terminal data packet, because This is not belonging to ' 884 data transmissions.Although they may be generated really in the case where being exceeded the scheduled time, " exchange is asked Ask " signal (abstract), however, the signal is unrelated with ' 884 signals.In addition, its single network is ISDN.

According to 5 disclosure of document, 14 kinds " not-ants "/" contradicts " relationship is obtained.

D-A.5) .1 not-ants D-A) .1: referring to CsoD-A) .1 do not communicate to connect/second switch (N)

D-A.5) .2 not-ants D-A) .2: referring to CsoD-A) .2, since M does not observe the part forwarding of data packet (N)

D-A.5) .3 not-ants D-A) .3: referring to CsoD-A) .3, since M only can expiring in its timer 14 In the case where change (N)

D-A.5) .4 contradicts D-A) .4: referring to CsoD-A) .4 (C)

D-A.5) .5 contradicts D-A) .5: referring to CsoD-A) .5 (referring to footnote 19) (C)

D-A.5) .6 contradicts D-A) .6: referring to CsoD-A) .6 (C)

D-B.5) .1 contradicts D-B) .1: referring to CsoD-B) .1 (C)

D-C.5) .1 contradicts D-C) .1: referring to CsoD-C) .1 (C)

D-C.5) .2 contradicts D-C) .2: referring to CsoD-C) .2 (C)

D-C.5) .3 not-ants D-C) .3: referring to CsoD-C) .3 (N)

D-C.5) .4 contradicts D-C) .4: referring to CsoD-C) .4 (C)

D-D.5) .1 contradicts D-D) .1: referring to CsoD-D) .1 (C)

D-D.5) .2 not-ants D-D) .2: referring to CsoD-D) .2 (N)

D-D.5) .3 not-ants D-D) .3: referring to CsoD-D) .3 (N)

II.C.6 LIMURA- document .6/NK 25a

Kimura discloses following " line * data packet selects communication system " comprising " net in the side of " user's line 21 " Network controls equipment 18 " or " grid controls equipment 18 " and " line termination device 19 " and " the communication pattern switching in its other side Equipment 20 " (page Fig. 3 a to Fig. 3 b and 281/282: the description of bottom/top).This two unit associations surveyed was got up by means of end The corresponding request at end or " exchanger " (line switching equipment/data packet friendship in=network of " control signal " as 21 One of exchange device, 13 or 14), " communication pattern " of terminal 17 is switched into line exchange business from packet-switching --- wherein, 21 be two kinds of network services can be that addressable unique " user's line " (rather than such as provides the net of these business on it Network).They are " per call or during the call according to communication form (form of session or document transmission form etc.), is used for The quality of the information of communication and/or concentric other<aspects>, share the line termination device of user ", execute 21 switching, 281 The final stage and the first segment of page 286 of page, wherein term " during the call " has very specific meaning, such as connects down It is explained.

Throughout " calling ", real time data transmission guarantees neither required by Kimura, if also not by its disclosure --- its " communication form " change, then only " communication pattern " of exchange termination a possibility that.This is particular by last of page 285/286 Row/the first row confirmation: that is, Kimura only transformation " ...According to communication form(form of session or document delivery form),Led to The quality of the information of letterAndAnother party of communication, have the effect of realizing the user of most suitable communication means, be used with shared The line termination device at family " --- in this case, he clearly provides him?" session communication form "PeriodExecute his change Change, this is for good and all maintained in the entire period of call, and wherein, its all data transmission occur.That is: Kimura There are no the transformations for designing him to guarantee real time data delivery quality throughout calling, also, he does not ensure it.

That is: by means of the transformation of Kimura, it is impossible to ensure real time data delivery quality throughout calling, because can not be When to threatening and/or the actual loss of quality is made a response, e.g., due to the quality of service of packet-switched network fluctuation or Inspection of the person to the non-availability of certain resource used in his equipment 18/19 required for packet-switched network for this purpose It surveys.

Finally, Kimura does not disclose/is claimed 21 " during the call " of transformation --- while communication form does not change Become, call is exactly such case --- active calls can be continued.Only in the disclosure for the transformation being related to " during calling " Rong Zhong, in case 3, absolutely without disclosing any similar content.On the contrary, in case 1 and case 2, Kimura it is also assumed that " upcoming calling " from the line interchanger 13 considered in case 3 herein (referring to page 284, right side, last Section) it is that (because if it is call, " communication form " that the former calls does not change, such as ' 884 cases for independent calling Example), once detect it --- unless its receive by terminal called 17 refuse (page 285, left side, first segment) --- Carry out " communication of packet-switching mode is terminated " (referring still to page 285, left side, lower half portion, that is, ' 884 phones are exhaled It cries).That is: during most right 21 Kimura exchange can also appear in ongoing packet-switching calling, however, this is at it Be due to the upcoming calling not being rejected from line interchanger 13 in the case where can interrupt.

This corresponds exactly to following technical problem (critically important in economic aspect at this moment), which is Kimura Last/first segment of page 281/282 want in detail solve and explain: that is, it is any access network line function of exchange Only single user's line 21 is provided a user at terminal 17 when with the two functions of packet-switching function.However, should Kimura solution does not still ensure to carry out by arbitrary packet-switched network (such as internet) and line exchange so far Call in real time data transmission, provided with not referring to the individually access of network as two.Therefore, if Only ISDN.PSTN is also addressable, then Kimura is claimed its solution and is suitable for according to by any packet-switching The needs for the call that network carries out ensure real-time data transmission --- however, in the above-mentioned reference fully aware oflyly pair It is provided and (is seen above).

Therefore, ' the 884 no any passes of variation of the data transmission between Kimura and two individual Web portal System --- very paradoxically: his role is intended to replace these individual networks to enter with the single entrance of both business Mouthful.

According to the disclosure of document 6, following 12 kinds " not-ants "/" contradicts " relationship is obtained:

D-A.6) .1 contradicts D-A) .1: referring to CsoD-A) .1, since the system of K is present in user's line 21 Both ends (C)

D-A.6) .2 contradicts D-A) .2: referring to CsoD-A) .2 sees above if K defines real-time reflection (C)

D-A.6) .3 contradicts D-A) .3: referring to CsoD-A) .3, and such as in CsoD-A) in .2 (C)

D-A.6) .4 not-ants D-A) .4: referring to CsoD-A) .4 (N)

D-A.6) .5 not-ants D-A) .5: referring to CsoD-A) .5 (N)

D-A.6) .6 contradicts D-A) .6: referring to CsoD-A) .6, see above (C)

D-C.6) .2 not-ants D-C) .2: referring to CsoD-C) .2 (N)

D-C.6) .3 not-ants D-C) .3: referring to CsoD-C) .3 (N)

D-C.6) .5 contradicts D-C) .5: referring to CsoD-C) .5, and referring to page 3, right side col.2, second segment (C)

D-D.6) .1 contradicts D-D) .1: referring to CsoD-D) .1, since the signal of K does not have all 3 kinds Alternative reason (C)

D-D.6) .2 contradicts D-D) .2: referring to CsoD-D) .2, because the signal of K can be rejected sometimes, See above (C)

D-D.6) .3 contradicts D-D) .3: referring to CsoD-D) .3, because the signal of K sometimes for recognizing, is joined See above (C)

II.C.7 TAXI system-document .7/K2

Technical document 7 and document 8/K3 equity, referring to following sections.

II.C.8 IDB-64/2.i- document .8/K3

Document 8 discloses IDB (=isdn dialup backup) system, has to the entrance of ISDN, and therefore can lead to The leased line of toning modulator-demodulator driving replaces being connected to the network --- in the case where breaking in the latter --- however, completely not Consideration replaces being connected to the network by packet-switched network, using based on the technology with line for rental and modem Very different technology.By IDB system carry out for ' 884 communication connection on ISDN establish replace network connection be also As defined in several other technologies reasons.Such as: IDB system absolutely not can only change single call or communication connection (because it may not even be aware that this that ' 884 inventions indispensably require is expressed the meaning), also, its ISDN bypasses its modulation /demodulation The foundation of the leased line of device driving continues (to destroy the required reality of ongoing call or communication connection in 1 to 4 second Shi Zhiliang).

According to the disclosure of document 8, following 15 kinds " not-ants "/" contradicts " relationship is obtained:

D-A.8) .1 contradicts D-A) .1: referring to CsoD-A) .1, due to the packet-switching transmission being prescribed (C)

D-A.8) .2 contradicts D-A) .2: referring to CsoD-A) .2, see above (C)

D-A.8) .3 contradicts D-A) .3: referring to CsoD-A) .3, see above (C)

D-A.8) .4 contradicts D-A) .4: referring to CsoD-A) .4 (C)

D-A.8) .5 contradicts D-A) .5: referring to CsoD-A) .5 (C)

D-A.8) .6 contradicts D-A) .6: referring to CsoD-A) .6, see above (C)

D-B.8) .1 contradicts D-B) .1: referring to CsoD-B) .1 (C)

D-C.8) .1 contradicts D-C) .1: referring to CsoD-C) .1 (C)

D-C.8) .2 contradicts D-C) .2: referring to CsoD-C) .2 (C)

D-C.8) .3 contradicts D-C) .3: referring to CsoD-C) .3 (C)

D-C.8) .4 contradicts D-C) .4: referring to CsoD-C) .4 (C)

D-C.8) .5 contradicts D-C) .5: referring to CsoD-C) .5 (C)

D-D.8) .1 contradicts D-D) .1: referring to CsoD-D) .1 (C)

D-D.8) .2 contradicts D-D) .2: referring to CsoD-D) .2 (C)

D-D.8) .3 contradicts D-D) .3: referring to CsoD-D) .3 (C)

II.C.9 MALEK- document .9/K8

Document 9 only discloses a large amount of aspects (usually to realize in these networks) of the business integration in communication network. Very different idea to the integrated purposes of packet-switched network and the individual interface of line exchange network (does not need this Any support of a little networks) --- technically and organizationally very it is different from the number at single network interface so far According to the integrated purposes of packet network business and line exchange network traffic --- it is related to even without by it, is single by it Do not have in communication connection.That is, the feelings of the Malek individual entrance in each of the individual network to both types ' 884 exchanges are performed under condition.

According to the disclosure of document 9, following 15 kinds " not-ants "/" contradicts " relationship is obtained:

D-A.9) .1 contradicts D-A) .1: referring to CsoD-A.9) .1, since the packet-switching being prescribed passes Send (C)

D-A.9) .2 contradicts D-A) .2: referring to CsoD-A.9) .2, see above (C)

D-A.9) .3 contradicts D-A) .3: referring to CsoD-A.9) .3 (C)

D-A.9) .4 contradicts D-A) .4: referring to CsoD-A.9) .4 (C)

D-A.9) .5 contradicts D-A) .5: referring to CsoD-A.9) .5 (C)

D-A.9) .6 contradicts D-A) .6: referring to CsoD-A.9) .6 (C)

D-B.9) .1 contradicts D-B) .1: referring to CsoD-B.9) .1 (C)

D-C.9) .1 contradicts D-C) .1: referring to CsoD-C.9) .1 (C)

D-C.9) .2 contradicts D-C) .2: referring to CsoD-C.9) .2 (C)

D-C.9) .3 contradicts D-C) .3: referring to CsoD-C.9) .3 (C)

D-C.9) .4 contradicts D-C) .4: referring to CsoD-C.9) .4 (C)

D-C.9) .5 contradicts D-C) .5: referring to CsoD-C.9) .5 (C)

D-D.9) .1 contradicts D-D) .1: referring to CsoD-D.9) .1 (C)

D-D.9) .2 contradicts D-D) .2: referring to CsoD-D.9) .2 (C)

D-D.9) .3 contradicts D-D) .3: referring to CsoD-D.9) .3 (C)

II.C.10 WACKER- document .10/K9

Similar to document 8 and its IDB system, document 10 contemplates Web portal, internal network interconnected Packet-switching business and line exchange business integrated purposes, although it has ignored the integrated of individual network completely completely Purposes the problem of because they are continually present in front of preference day and still have so far.Primary difference is that: It, which is concentrated, discusses and supports the connection of direct LAN/LAN modem, in order to avoid its overload or failure or temporary replacement (because of They may be more more expensive than ISDN connection), wherein now, the IDB system of document 8 is replaced with following system, which includes IA (=" ISDN adapter ") and suitable LAN/LAN router.

According to the disclosure of document 10, following 15 kinds " not-ants "/" contradicts " relationship is obtained:

D-A.10) .1 contradicts D-A) .1: referring to CsoD-A) .1 (C)

D-A.10) .2 contradicts D-A) .2: referring to CsoD-A) .2 (C)

D-A.10) .3 contradicts D-A) .3: referring to CsoD-A) .3 (C)

D-A.10) .4 contradicts D-A) .4: referring to CsoD-A) .4 (C)

D-A.10) .5 contradicts D-A) .5: referring to CsoD-A) .5 (C)

D-A.10) .6 contradicts D-A) .6: referring to CsoD-A) .6 (C)

D-B.10) .1 contradicts D-B) .1: referring to CsoD-B) .1 (C)

D-C.10) .1 contradicts D-C) .1: referring to CsoD-C) .1 (C)

D-C.10) .2 contradicts D-C) .2: referring to CsoD-C) .2 (C)

D-C.10) .3 contradicts D-C) .3: referring to CsoD-C) .3 (C)

D-C.10) .4 contradicts D-C) .4: referring to CsoD-C) .4 (C)

D-C.10) .5 contradicts D-C) .5: referring to CsoD-C) .5 (C)

D-D.10) .1 contradicts D-D) .1: referring to CsoD-D) .1 (C)

D-D.10) .2 contradicts D-D) .2: referring to CsoD-D) .2 (C)

D-D.10) .3 contradicts D-D) .3: referring to CsoD-D) .3 (C)

II.C.11 AVM- document .11/K11

Document 11 and document 8 and document 10 disclose identical technical teaching, explain: now, ISDN adapter and road It is integrated by device, also, is also known as fallback circuit in the background technology instead of circuit for what such as modem was directly connected to, and And now, long-range connection is main is carried out by ISDN, wherein at this point, usually using popular NetWare multi-protocols road By device (so that indeed, it is possible to by its route all important lan protocols and WAN agreement, especially IPX, TCP/IP, Apple dialogue ...).However, these " network interdynamic abilities " aspect of data transmission and their real-time quality (are calls In independent property) without any relationship.Therefore, the connection of phone and the AVN router is technically excluded again, As the monitoring to the quality individually communicated to connect and execute dynamic transition.

According to the disclosure of document 11, following 15 kinds of " contradicts " relationships are obtained:

D-A.11) .1 contradicts D-A) .1: referring to CsoD-A) .1 (C)

D-A.11) .2 contradicts D-A) .2: referring to CsoD-A) .2 (C)

D-A.11) .3 contradicts D-A) .3: referring to CsoD-A) .3 (C)

D-A.11) .4 contradicts D-A) .4: referring to CsoD-A) .4 (C)

D-A.11) .5 contradicts D-A) .5: referring to CsoD-A) .5 (C)

D-A.11) .6 contradicts D-A) .6: referring to CsoD-A) .6 (C)

D-B.11) .1 contradicts D-B) .1: referring to CsoD-B) .1 (C)

D-C.11) .1 contradicts D-C) .1: referring to CsoD-C) .1 (C)

D-C.11) .2 contradicts D-C) .2: referring to CsoD-C) .2 (C)

D-C.11) .3 contradicts D-C) .3: referring to CsoD-C) .3 (C)

D-C.11) .4 contradicts D-C) .4: referring to CsoD-C) .4 (C)

D-C.11) .5 contradicts D-C) .5: referring to CsoD-C) .5 (C)

D-D.11) .1 contradicts D-D) .1: referring to CsoD-D) .1 (C)

D-D.11) .2 contradicts D-D) .2: referring to CsoD-D) .2 (C)

D-D.11) .3 contradicts D-D) .3: referring to CsoD-D) .3 (C)

II.C.12 TADAMURA- document .12/NK37 and document .4/NK23

These, which are described in detail, is based on document 7/NK37, consistent with the content of document 4/NK23.

The technical teaching of Tadamura is based on that " communication control unit 200 ", special " isdn terminal adapter " (Fig. 2 a is extremely Fig. 2 e and Figure 26), in the case where actual mode proves unsuitable situation, the data communication carried out by ISDN is handed over from data Mold changing formula switches to line switch mode, alternatively, vice versa, col.1:11-44.According to will be by it come the technical issues of solution Description --- by means of its objective criteria 1-4 in col.2:24-62 --- and to according to the invention in col.2:63-68 Associated solution be also known as the description of technical teaching, it was demonstrated that he not yet designs its conversion, to ensure the reality of data transmission Shi Zhiliang such as makes it be suitble to Internet Protocol telephone communication.By the Tadamura all these 4 problems description provided and solution Scheme --- it is also known as in the case where the execution of the switch decision carried out by network management in centre, being absolutely thus can be independent --- disclose: his technical solution clearly eliminates ensuring in real time for its data transmission.In addition, it is only known Road single network, i.e. ISDN.

According to the disclosure of document 12, following 15 kinds " not-ants "/" contradicts " relationship is obtained:

D-A.12) .1 contradicts D-A) .1: referring to CsoD-A) .1, since T. does not know ' 884 signals (C)

D-A.12) .2 contradicts D-A) .2: referring to CsoD-A) .2, since T. eliminates real time data transmission, See above (C)

D-A.12) .3 contradicts D-A) .3: referring to CsoD-A) .3, in T., connection cannot trigger change (C)

D-A.12) .4 not-ants D-A) .4: referring to CsoD-A) .4 (N)

D-A.12) .5 contradicts D-A) .5: referring to CsoD-A) .5 (referring to footnote 12) (C)

D-A.12) .6 contradicts D-A) .6: referring to CsoD-A) .6, see above (C)

D-B.12) .1 contradicts D-B) .1: referring to CsoD-B) .1 (C)

D-C.12) .1 contradicts D-C) .1: referring to CsoD-C) .1 (C)

D-C.12) .2 contradicts D-C) .2: referring to CsoD-C) .2 (C)

D-C.12) .3 not-ants D-C) .3: referring to CsoD-C) .3 (N)

D-C.12) .4 contradicts D-C) .4: referring to CsoD-C) .4 (C)

D-C.12) .5 contradicts D-C) .5: referring to CsoD-C) .5 (C)

D-D.12) .1 contradicts D-D) .1: referring to CsoD-D) .1 (C)

D-D.12) .2 contradicts D-D) .2: referring to CsoD-D) .2 (C)

D-D.12) .3 contradicts D-D) .3: referring to CsoD-D) .3 (C)

II.C.13 LEE- document .13/NK38

The technical teaching of Lee has been practiced " dynamic connection management in integrated communication network ", abstract and Fig. 9 --- and it is more smart Really: in single " the integrated communication network of connection orientation ", col.1:15-18,2:52-54, not over further grinding The other ISDN studied carefully is excluded, and still, now, is not yet achievable --- and it maintains its acceptable during " connection " QOS (=quality of service).Its all claim are actually pure claim to a method, are described as follows, the party Formula makes them not know the interchanger of any interchanger or network internal or the interchanger of network-external completely.Its Only recognized at the network two terminal users and its between information transmission, col.1:15-18.That is: it is even without open How the two users interact with the single communication network, but eliminate their each 2 networks using for this Entrance.

Mode that it indicates philosophical --- but absolutely not can ---: information therebetween is transmitted by means of network Function realizes, selection for this network operating method and along suitable path distribute philosophic approach thus.Communication Logical associations between terminal user, he is named as " calling ", supports its network operating method at any time He is named as " connection " chain --- along with upper pathway ---, also, by the way that " connection management, he names network function, the network Connection is established, maintains and released to function ", col.1:18-27.He supports exhaling in the logical generation of various moment at excessively different connections It cries.

According to the disclosure of document 13, following 15 kinds " not-ants "/" contradicts " relationship is obtained:

D-A.13) .1 contradicts D-A) .1: referring to CsoD-A) .1, since Lee (=L) does not know any exchange Machine (C)

D-A.13) .2 contradicts D-A) .2: referring to CsoD-A) .2, see above (C)

D-A.13) .3 contradicts D-A) .3: referring to CsoD-A) .3, see above (C)

D-A.13) .4 contradicts D-A) .4: referring to CsoD-A) .4, see above (C)

D-A.13) .5 contradicts D-A) .5: referring to CsoD-A) .5, see above (C)

D-A.13) .6 contradicts D-A) .6: referring to CsoD-A) .6, see above (C)

D-B.13) .1 not-ants D-B) .1: referring to CsoD-B) .1 (N)

D-C.13) .1 contradicts D-C) .1: referring to CsoD-C) .1, since L does not recognize any line exchange It connects (C)

D-C.13) .2 not-ants D-C) .2: referring to CsoD-C) .2, since L is in this regard it is not anticipated that anything (N)

D-C.13) .3 not-ants D-C) .3: referring to CsoD-C) .3, since L is in this regard it is not anticipated that anything (N)

D-C.13) .4 contradicts D-C) .4: referring to CsoD-C) .4 (C)

D-C.13) .5 contradicts D-C) .5: referring to CsoD-C) .5 (C)

D-D.13) .1 contradicts D-D) .1: referring to CsoD-D) .1, since L does not know any interchanger (C)

D-D.13) .2 contradicts D-D) .2: referring to CsoD-D) .2, since L does not know any interchanger (C)

D-D.13) .3 contradicts D-D) .3: referring to CsoD-D) .3, since L does not know any interchanger (C)

II.C.14 DOGUCHI- document .14/NK40

The technical teaching of Noguchi concentrate discuss " distributed treatment isdn switch " Functional Design (referring to abstract or Person col.3/4:44/12).Patent describes the structures of the latter, as the present invention, including the bus system function inside interchanger Can unit (60/61/62) and the terminal side for being connected to it functional unit (10,11) and enter DTE in/come from Processing/the execution of " voice/data " information of DTE/transformation side functional unit (30,40,50) and these functional unit groups It interacts.Therefore, absolutely and it is from one to the data transmission of distributed operation isdn switch as another The transformation of the purposes of aspect and/or the data transmission in the purposes of the purposes from packet-switched network to line exchange network does not have Any relationship, it is thus impossible to propose and (be not present) the real-time quality feature of data transmission.

According to the disclosure of document 14, following 15 kinds " not-ants "/" contradicts " relationship is obtained:

D-A.14) .1 contradicts D-A) .1: referring to CsoD-A.14) .1, it is due to Noguchi it is not anticipated that any PSN (C)

D-A.14) .2 contradicts D-A) .2: referring to CsoD-A.14) .2, since N. eliminates PSN (C)

D-A.14) .3 contradicts D-A) .3: referring to CsoD-A.14) .3, see above (C)

D-A.14) .5 contradicts D-A) .5: referring to CsoD-A.14) .5, see above (C)

D-A.14) .6 contradicts D-A) .6: referring to CsoD-A.14) .6, see above (C)

D-B.14) .1 contradicts D-B) .1: referring to CsoD-B.14) .1, see above (C)

D-C.14) .1 contradicts D-C) .1: referring to CsoD-C.14) .1, see above (C)

D-C.14) .2 not-ants D-C) .2: referring to CsoD-C.14) .2, see above (N)

D-C.14) .3 not-ants D-C) .3: referring to CsoD-C.14) .3, since L is in this regard it is not anticipated that any Thing (N)

D-C.14) .4 contradicts D-C) .4: referring to CsoD-C.14) .4, since L eliminates PSN (C)

D-C.14) .5 contradicts D-C) .5: referring to CsoD-C.14) .5, see above (C)

D-D.14) .1 contradicts D-D) .1: referring to CsoD-D.14) .1, since N eliminates network management (C)

D-D.14) .2 contradicts D-D) .2: referring to CsoD-D.14) .2, since N eliminates " ' 884 " trigger (C)

D-D.14) .3 contradicts D-D) .3: referring to CsoD-D.14) .3, since N eliminates PSN (C)

II.C.15 ARCHIBALD- document .15/NK41

The technical teaching of Archibald is based on following " data communication network ", uses " leased line " 102 as " main Communication channel ", and use " dial line " 101 of " telephone network " 200 as between two modems 100 and 300 " backup communication channels/secondary communication channel ", two modems 100 and 300 are connected to two DTE 50 and 450 again. When the reduction of " signal quality " on an experience leased line in two modems, dial line is automatically set up " data connection ".

According to the disclosure of document 15, following 15 kinds " not-ants "/" contradicts " relationship is obtained:

D-A.15) .1 contradicts D-A) .1: referring to CsoD-A) .1, since Archibald eliminates data packet Exchange network (C)

D-A.15) .2 contradicts D-A) .2: referring to CsoD-A) .2, see above (C)

D-A.15) .3 contradicts D-A) .3: referring to CsoD-A) .3, see above (C)

D-A.15) .4 contradicts D-A) .4: referring to CsoD-A) .4, since Archibald eliminates phone It connects (C)

D-A.15) .5 contradicts D-A) .5: referring to CsoD-A) .5, since Archibald eliminates data packet Exchange network (C)

D-A.15) .6 contradicts D-A) .6: referring to CsoD-A) .6, see above (C)

D-B.15) .1 contradicts D-B) .1: referring to CsoD-B) .1, see above (C)

D-C.15) .1 contradicts D-C) .1: referring to CsoD-C) .1, see above (C)

D-C.15) .2 contradicts D-C) .2: referring to CsoD-C) .2, see above (C)

D-C.15) .3 not-ants D-C) .3: referring to CsoD-C) .3, since A is in this regard it is not anticipated that anything (N)

D-C.15) .4 contradicts D-C) .4: referring to CsoD-C) .4, since Archibald eliminates data packet Exchange network (C)

D-C.15) .5 contradicts D-C) .5: referring to CsoD-C) .5, since A. eliminates packet-switched network (C)

D-D.15) .1 contradicts D-D) .1: referring to CsoD-D) .1, since A eliminates the network pipe for this Reason

D-D.15) .2 contradicts D-D) .2: referring to CsoD-D) .2, since A eliminates " ' 884 " for this Trigger (C)

D-D.15) .3 not-ants D-D) .3: referring to CsoD-D) .3, since A must determine first " bit error rate " (N)

II.C.16 VAZVAN- document .16/S1

The problem of about other related properties/attribute/concept is identified, the expection document claimed allow people's sense emerging very much Interest, as discussed in I.B chapters and sections.These other related properties/attribute/concepts be not to ' 884 FSTP analysis in all It needs, but TTVazvan is added to ' release that the RS of 884TPR can have worry related with the problem is felt, pre- Phase is ' although 884 TT.p are to what degree --- it handles the technology for differing substantially from the technical issues of being solved by ' 884 TT.p Problem²¹⁾。

In order to prove it is such feel not need any basis, II.C.16 chapters and sections show D attribute it is a large amount of not Together --- and be also known as in concept or even become apparent from B attribute --- both supports, ' 884 TT.p and TTVazvan (referring to D- of the II.A.1.3 into II.A.1.4 chapters and sectionsANCMatrix and B-ANCMatrix), that is, do not have in the D attribute or B attribute of TTVazvan There is the D attribute or B attribute that can actually disclose TT.p.

Interestingly by it, here, these differences are also due to the existing technical literature quilt only claimed at this Caused by ' 884 concepts (such as " permanent " concept in C.15) being introduced into when presentation, it must be added to by TTVazvan Although being not yet noted before the RS of ' 884 PTR --- these other properties/attributes/concepts really prior to the addition and In the presence of (but can be later incoherent, referring to I.A.5 chapters and sections).

The technical teaching of Vazvan has handled the integrated system of movably veil and satellite network, he is referred to as MUMTS (=multi-mode Universal Mobile Telecommunications System), fixing line network (31,32,33,34) are also connected to, by so-called MMT/DMT (=multi-mode/dual-mode terminal) terminal (43) uses.Although mobile, however, this terminal can be by requesting access to phase The network answered is established and one " connection " of several networks after the other --- more accurately: one " data link ", one Next, also, after receiving identical request, use the various businesses of " network of connection ".At it from a network When being moved to another network, MMI/DMT also known as " is transmitted " by " transfer ", more accurately, by " access (required/institute Authorization) transfer also known as transmitting ", its can be forwarded to connect (that is, data link).For its matter of the handover decision based on connection Amount --- and ' 884 change of team signals usually ignore quality.

Note that " connection " of VAZVAN (it is the language " data link " of standardized communications experts in the world²⁰⁾) be not ' 884 terminal-to-terminal service " communication connection " of call disclosed in ' 884 specifications --- that is, patent of VAZVAN ---.

I) " connection " should be understood as being on the one hand DMT/MMT and another party is MSC (ground) or satellite earth station Data link between (non-ground) --- referring to such as 7:33,8:36,9:4,11:10,12:5-6,13:11-12,21:4,21: 35,22:2,22:15,24:14,24:20,24:37,25:3,25:33 page.

Ii) " connection " allows users to the network in DMT/MMT " real time access " (8:34 pages) MUMTS, more accurately: Access MSC (terrestrial network) or its satellite earth station (non-terrestrial network).It realizes DMT/MMT's and MUMTSConnection, and nonterminal To terminalCommunication connectionAlthough --- access connection is necessary to the technology of the latter is realized.

Iii) " connection " between DMT/MMT and its current network in " access transfer " by DMT/MMT and new MSC, " connection " between new satellite earth station replaces (6:8,6:16-16,9:1-6,13:11-12,20:9 page).DMT/MMT is therefore As will not be for good and all had the entrance with network needed for the transmission of its data in ' 884 cases, but must enter so every time Network before replace requesting the entrance (9:4-6 pages), and its current network is therefore left, this is because it is at any time Only may belong to single network (with transfer the period separate), that is, belong to its VLR by comprising network (20:1-6,20:9-11 Page).

Iv) " connection " of the DMT/MMT in new network is only deposited after its access of its MSC or satellite earth station authorization In its i.e. " receiving " transfer (7:2 pages is used for the former, and 7:4 pages is used for the latter).DMT/MMT can make at no time Established with line exchange network and exchange connection with the line of second switch --- this is disclosed even without by VAZVAN (due to wherein It does not need).

It v) is strange for ' 884 patents to " access request " of network, wherein (referring to 8 and 9 rows in Fig. 1) For two interchangers, the access to two networks is permanent available.

Vi) " calling " can represent a) terminal to terminal data transmission, and/or b) ' 884 communications of call in principle It connects, and/or c) for good and all using above-mentioned two interchanger --- still, VAZVAN does not disclose any in this 3 features It is a, but technically it is referred to " data call ".

Vii) for " calling ", VAZVAN is not disclosed by immediately becoming line switching network if the latter is challenged Network is come the real-time quality for the data transmission for ensuring to realize by packet-switched network, because network does not need simply any When it is all available, although in ' 884 cases so.

Viii) VAZVAN is maintained really: the transfer " interruption " that calling may be " connected " during the calling using it (page 19/20) --- however, he is absolutely without disclosing any so that how he realizes this (since this is not priority date A part of common skill before, as current).

Ix) transfer that VAZVAN explicitly discloses " connection " between two networks of MUMTS require these networks it Between detailed cooperation and information exchange to realize its (referring to description of Fig. 1,6:19 pages -7:20 pages) --- however, ' 884 turns Changing such cooperation between packet-switched network and line exchange network involved in not needing and/or information exchange, (this two Person does not know about ' 884 conversions occurred therebetween even).

X) VAZVAN is explicitly disclosed, and the handover decision of " connection " is generally also based on the quality of connection --- and very much In case, ' 884 conversion signals do not need such consideration.

Above-mentioned difference i)-x) it shows, VAZVAN and ' 884 patents handle generally different telecommunication configuration, generally not Same problem and generally different solutions.

TT of Vazvan itself is limited to mobile network and mobile terminal.However, since it was once describing (9:29-31 pages) It is indefinite, and it is also mentioned that fixed network/telephone terminal, so, preceding paragraph also allows to generate accordingly --- However, this does not influence the following relationship fact.

According to the disclosure of document 16, following 15 kinds " not-ants "/" contradicts " relationship is obtained:

D-A.16) .1 contradicts D-A) .1: referring to CsoD-A) .1, since Vazvan eliminates ' 884 signals (C)

D-A.16) .2 contradicts D-A) .2: referring to CsoD-A) .2, go out to transmit since V eliminates terminal itself Number (C)

D-A.16) .3 not-ants D-A) .3: referring to CsoD-A) .3, due to V it is not anticipated that any packet-switching net Network (N)

D-A.16) .4 not-ants D-A) .4: referring to CsoD-A) .4, due to V it is not anticipated that any call (N)

D-A.16) .5 contradicts D-A) .5: referring to CsoD-A) .5, usually there is PSN since V eliminates terminal Entrance (C)

D-A.16) .6 not-ants D-A) .6: referring to CsoD-A) .6, due to V it is not anticipated that access to PSN (N)

D-B.16) .1 not-ants D-B) .1: referring to CsoD-B) .1, due to V it is not anticipated that any packet-switching net Network (N)

D-C.16) .1 contradicts D-C) .1: referring to CsoD-C) .1, enter since V is eliminated with constant LSN The terminal (C) of mouth

D-C.16) .2 not-ants D-C) .2: referring to CsoD-C) .2, since V only refers to data network (N)

D-C.16) .3 contradicts D-C) .3: referring to CsoD-C) .3, since V is in this regard it is not anticipated that any Thing (C)

D-C.16) .4 contradicts D-C) .4: referring to CsoD-C) .4, enter since V is eliminated with constant PSN The terminal (C) of mouth

D-C.16) .5 contradicts D-C) .5: referring to CsoD-C) .5, enter since V is eliminated with constant LSN The terminal (C) of mouth

D-D.16) .1 contradicts D-D) .1: referring to CsoD-D) .1, since V eliminates network management signals

D-D.16) .2 not-ants D-D) .2: referring to CsoD-D) .2, since V eliminates " footnote 13 " signal (N)

D-D.16) .3 contradicts D-D) .3: referring to CsoD-D) .3, since V eliminates " user is transparent " letter Number (C)

III.Subject of the present invention and its other detailed description

TT.p of the meaning of term in the text of following following claims based on present patent application^1),2)。

Disclosed TT.p includes IT architecture --- that is, any one of the embodiment of TT.p is and time effectively work The computer HW/SW system of work, the system have many very different) HW/SW computer interface and ..) information result And its complicated relationship --- make it possible to complicated real-time patent expert system overcomes intrinsic technology barrier, the system energy It is enough:

Therefore ■ " under its connection/analytical model " executes its FSTP analysis, and for any PTR

■ " under its real-time mode " is immediately replied and is analyzed related any inquiry with the FSTP of the PTR.

" real-time " expression FSTP expert system can within the tolerable period, with the information inquired or In the real-time session of the related smoothness of person --- that is, replying the information analyzed the FSTP for being related to the PTR in most 5 seconds Any inquiry.

In the FSTP analysis of the PTR of support following following claims, term " information " can indicate ontology (a part) And/or such recognizable and recognizable item of information is indicated automatically and/or interactively.That is: term " item of information " expression pair If a part or stem portion of the significant information for technical staff, technical staff holds concentration and automatic language is discussed And/or the college diploma and the technology analysis for practicing patent of several years of knowledge transformation.

In the presence of will the present patent application used in following claim disclosure apparent hint:

Generation and " the reciprocity TT " of the significant modification of invented TT.p is described in detail in ■

Resistance.

The violation of ■ detailed description claim.

Each document, which is described in detail, in ■ has several FSTP-B levels with several TT and/or each TT.

■ be described in detail input/output present with identification/it is consistent/emphasize problem.

■ compares two different analyses of PTR, e.g., and can be from different pmgp.

■ by original D level/B level language switching at derived from technical ability or formal or computer it is accessible Language.

■ is limited and/or is discharged the limitation that at least one FSTP expresses the meaning, such as " D level/B level ", " disclosure ", " plcs dependence .pmgp dependence ", " q-cM ", " idea ", " sub- Patent Law ", " finiteness ", " combinableness ", " q-AC ", " q-AC/mod (q-cM) " ... and/or combination thereof and/or the relationship at least another, such as "ANCRelationship ", " plcs choosing " ....

■ in time and/or relative to other concept change attributes and/or concept, especially under various limitations and/or In view of the inherent limitations in AC embodiment, their pmgp independence/plcs independence is checked.

■ " FSTP-HW " is supported, (" is based on by ASIC (" applying specific integrated chip ") or these integrated SKBC The controller of specific knowledge ").

■ is analyzed in identification/determination " patent securitization " and effective " TT.p invention motivation " using FSTP.

A part of some NPS is applied to some PTR problem using FSTP by ■.

■ determines that (that is, its invention) of venture existing is known relative to related except patent field using FSTP Know semantic height/effective height and/or to design " most preferably cooperating " TT.

■ carrys out the specific expert system of design motif using FSTP.

The TT that ■ sells venture using FSTP expert system is also known as product.

Footnote:

1 when explaining the claim of patent, if its text is related to conceiving by " method adds function ", US precedent Allow its specification to force " design limits " to the meaning of claim and (otherwise ignores its limitation, as disclosed in its specification ) although --- precedent and European Patent Convention (EPC) 69 of BGH require according to patent specification/attached drawing/claim It determines the meaning of the term for the TT.p that the claim of claim and patent is based on, is not contradicted each other with evaluating them (wherein, TT.p therein is disclosed with being assumed the realization for the technical issues of being provided by patent²⁾Solution is only wrapped Containing an independent method and/or device claim¹²⁾), also, therefore, it is based only upon claim and (also, therefore, supports Its TT.p, referring to II.A.1. to II.A.1.2 chapters and sections) the meaning of so-called determination of term execute to claim It explains.

Two national patent systems, " NPS " (Patent Law, patent precedent, the rule of Patent Office, vow including country are just The technical specialist of duty ...), also referred to as " national valid system, NLS " --- " country " represents US and EU herein --- allow special Property/fact clearly with obscure is disclosed in benefit, that is, " inside patent ", " outside patent " disclosure indicates TT.p Property

■ " by disclosing with clearing ", if it includes the text for the property for clearly showing that disclosure and/or figure, with And

■ " by obscurely open ", if there is no such characters/graphic, however

(a) (related with TT.p) technical staff understands --- and in BGH, the technology of the inauguration of their own is special Family --- the property of TT.p indicated by patent specification/claim characters/graphic, and/or

(b) it is indispensable, and Buddhist is full-amount, and the meaning of the text in description and claims contradicts (only EPC), And/or

(c) one or several TT.i, the expected TT.p of a combination thereof, are limited by property, and opposite property is by will be at Document p for the X of TT.p) .n is clearly or obscurely open --- such X) .n is usually not considered as the property of TT.p (referring to I.A.5 chapters and sections).

Clearly/obscure disclosure is also known as these definition of internal/external disclosure --- with patent/ The apparent property problem of (non-) of claim is related --- and it is also applied to any non-patent literature and seems in any NPS Interior (although generating different flavours herein).If law court disallows the X of its TT.p) .n, two NPS seem it is shared with Refusal patent owner's obtains the related identical view of ruling by law right of fair trial.

The disclosure for such hint that I.B discusses patent to I.E chapters and sections is also known as the important of external disclosure Property --- therefore be to be solved based on (as in (b)) of technical ability (as in (a)) either logic-based by II.A.1.2 chapters and sections It releases, and visible by means of Fig. 2 a to Fig. 2 e.In many PTR, the best mode for handling them is to introduce in addition " maximum B Level " term/express the meaning (referring to I.A.5 chapters and sections), accurately and non-fuzzy illustrate it is such it is obscure/external with And the meaning of clearly/inside disclosure^10),14)--- if FSTP analysis test is in analysis compared with the existing technology special Benefit/(non-) of claim apparent property when (referring specifically to the I.K chapters and sections) realized.

2 in several NPS, the presentation of the thinking in this direction that their precedent includes: US Supreme Court exists Require to consider " inventive idea " in its KSR judgement, its German opponent by its cloth it is even he that with the prior art be greater than 1 A " independent thought step " determines that the unobviousness of TT.p, the two all pass through discussed patent disclosure.It is more accurate Ground: the X of German BGH^thAbout the independence for determining TT.p first since Panel automatic its 1999 " Spannschraube " judgement It is made that two-combats is adjudicated --- (that is, what they are meant that, such as pass through branch to clarify the meaning of the technical term of claim Its TT.p determination is supportted, is the association base in association base/actual effect semantically of the sentence of the claim, it is such as logical Cross what the endings of I.E chapters and sections was explained), and be based only upon this and execute the patent/claim and explain¹⁾.Securely based on this Basis, BGH is at itSeveral " independent thought steps have clearly been determined in judgement (2008) Expressing the meaning suddenly " --- here, being known as " independent idea " --- is in several preceding judgements for the unobviousness for confirming TT.p In be determined such independent idea obscurely after.

No one of these BGH judgement extremely meets term " independent idea ", however, they are still through talking about in this way Idea result come using less novel other terms expressed the meaning are indicated, such as quote more than one " variation of element " or " variation of its execution sequence ".That is: these judgements are not yet recognized, such technique variation depends on inventor and generates for the first time Control their " idea of change " --- adjudicating and recognized such as the KSR by US Supreme law court --- that is, this The independent idea of sample is also known as inventive idea and independently supports such variation and the therefore extension of the prior art¹⁰⁾。

By making these terms/rationalization of expressing the meaning, find: the idea of this change is only the concept of the prior art¹⁰⁾Change The idea of change.Such change of the prior art be referred to here as the RS of the prior art " notional modification, 1-cM ", more accurately Ground¹⁴⁾, it is " 1-cM of some AC from RS " more accurately (still to join for the 1-cM of .n " some attribute X.i in the AC) " See I.A.1 and I.A.4 chapters and sections).Therefore, it expresses the meaning " from RS⁺Some AC q >=0 q-cM ", be correspondingly defined to include q A 1-cM, also, its variation claims the result of AC to be indicated with " AC/mod (q-cM) ", wherein q=0,1,2 ....

Note that for PTR, some time⁹⁾Some AC some attribute X.i) 1-cM of .n may be implemented to the another of AC One X ' .i ') .n ' the concept other reference, can be by X ' .i ') .n ' it is possibleNCRelationship becomesARelationship.At this Concept is by X.i) .n and X ' .i ') with reference in the case where twice, this is particularly likely to occur .n ', wherein to be analyzed for avoiding PTR the fact that correctly define present level its be one of the main purpose of FSTP analysis method.

Although 3, in ' 884 patents, only its claim elements provides in English, English specification US patent 6, 954,453 B1 are provided,Reference basis as all subsequent applications from ' 884 specifications.3 US patents 7,145, 902,7,483,431 and 7,936,751 be ' 453 patents division.Because the specification that they all pass through them discloses identical TT.p, only " the claim difference " of US patent is a problem --- need one by one right to analysis requirement, the FSTP analysis Result the claim of 4 US patents of the patent family is even more set up.Due to not knowing that any " right is wanted in EPC The head for the text asked ", so here, considering ' 884 patents in order to simple.

The selection of these 16 documents --- it is special in opposition ' 884 from 50 existing technical literatures claimed in total BGH is obeyed in the invalid complaint of benefit --- based on the judgement made by BGH.These 16 documents are: doc.1=WO 90/ 12466, doc.2=US 5,347,516, doc.e=Lucent, doc.4=doc.12, doc.5=JP7-154426, doc.6 =JP57-159 153, doc.7=doc.8, doc.8=IDB-64/2, doc.9=Malek, doc.10=Wacker, Doc.11=AVM, doc.12=US5,517,662, doc.13=Lee, doc.14=US4,977,556, doc.15=US 5, 479,650,96.28947 doc.16=WO.In fact, only first 13 therein selected by BGH, remaining 3 later by Cisco/Nokia is provided.Non-patent literature i can get from author --- and it is other to can get from corresponding database.

The fact that in view of 16 possible expected document i, is opposite with the tendency of US and EU, only to allow will be several TT.i is merged into expected TT.p.However, this big quantity has the glamour for the property for proposing TT.p --- be then in It is existing --- it can hinder following invalid attack for it from the beginning.This is one of explanation, why uses moral herein The case of BGH law court, state, although similar case is also undetermined in Delaware District law court.

4 in short, the derivation may be dull, however it is unessential, such as ' 884 D- in ' 884 casesANCSquare Battle array/B-ANCMatrix is at first sight shown.

5 this root in the thinking to natural language in the theory of knowledge of Wittgenstein research (referring to such as him 3 and 4 of " Tractatus Logico-Philosophicus ").Recently, this is by Dijkstra¹⁵⁾Approve, and The method of the formal specification of all systems.Kant has passed through the even stronger state recognition art of natural language The basic shortage of idea in language/express the meaning, show: " I is right in any special naturology and maintains it, only true in this way Science it can be found that because there are mathematical discoveries " (" the metaphysical basis of natural science ", Immanuel Kant, 1786).The opinion of his early stage, which has become unintentionally, instructs theme in terms of developing FSTP test.It therefore, can be by Be considered as in the special theory that the true technology of (non-) apparent property indicates real science --- it is considered as herein Natural special theory, due to its authenticity (otherwise nonsensical).

6 for not mixing, express the meaning " data transmission " be also known as TRANSFER^7),8),20), " transmission data " are referring to footnote 20.

7 data transmissions/TRANSFER " substantially real-time " attribute is meant that, with its involved in it is true Processing sufficiently synchronously occurs, as call is handled.Specifically, about the processing and its data transmission/TRANSFER, ' 884 Patent and all International Telecommunication Unions require any time to be later less than 0.5 second.There is no one in 16 document i of Yi Hasang A to do the best, the real-time quality may be implemented in data transmission --- and may be chief reason below: why they are complete It is claimed suitable for call (they even wholly without refer to telephonic communication) in inhibition^6),8),20)。

Note: the synchronization properties/attributes of ' 884 specific data transmission/TRANSFER, which are also known as real-time/attribute, is not " absolute " and be only " substantially ", and only as expectation of the user for call is guided.I.e.: where data pass Give/tolerable delay time of the TRANSFER during call setup can be slightly longer than it in the tolerable of session Delay time.However, ' 884-TT.p is extracted from the difference: data transmission/TRANSFER monitoring to call and Detection delay --- during the call setup of call or occurring later on --- is so that it generates expression from for using The signal of data transmission/TRANSFER transmission (=conversion) of the PSN of LSN (referring to II.A.1.3 chapters and sections).

Delay event as 8 (forever indicate delay and do not notice how the first interchanger becomes to know it) can be with (that is, some position at) in the communication connection considered and go out present in the various positions of monitored TRANSFER Now in all cases.Their possible the reason of occurring and the example of position are: exporting using packet-switched network When the data of the communication connection considered, the first interchanger has used up buffer space (e.g., for being packaged from electricity as needed The data of words group) or it has used up other resources (e.g., suitable compression chip resource) thus or it cannot be by data Packet be transmitted to packet-switched network (e.g., someone by plug be pushed to itself or its met with certain internal control limit System), alternatively, it finds, --- wherein, ' 884 TT.p do not need to explain how to realize the discovery to technical staff --- is to passing through Unacceptable delay/shake of the received data of second switch, alternatively, second switch is with the first interchanger with similar The problem of, or ..., wherein once first switch performs any movement in communication connection, then in these events Any one can occur, and have existed, and want the ground of terminal called as first switch has received from calling terminal Location^6),7),20)。

Now, --- that is, only afterlight --- is only not important to any appearance of the event in the case where The automatic release of ' 884 convert signals ensure that the real-time quality of ' 884 communication connections considered really, that is, its is monitored The real-time quality of ' 884 TRANSFER communication connection, therefore meet the requirements above for guaranteeing col.3:59-62 real-time quality.

9 these 11 ' 884D attribute is: A) .1 to A) .6, C) .2, C) .3 and D) .1 to D) .3.

Note, however, occurring other D level problem herein, in the common feelings of q-AC/mod (q-cM) expected TT.p Under condition: for making each D-X) the .n corresponding D-X.i that passes through the q-AC) .n/mod (q-cM) is expected, and q 1-cM is necessary It is created one by one¹⁰⁾, think deeply orderly processing.The sequence for executing them may include 1. or 2 ... or q^th1-cM, due at this At least one of its 1-cM is led in sequence and is technically obstructed, that is, so that it is contradicted^14).A.If this is answered For any sequence, then the value of q is only Q^plcsLower bound.Leave follow-up study for, it is usually such with the presence or absence of avoiding The suitable B level of problem.

10 for PTR, D concept/B concept and its it is whole be value/illustration term and its set (referring to I.A.4 chapters and sections), Therefore its model problem is assumed it is uncontested known in related technical staff: they are as logic D/B- expression/category Property provide that the basis D/B is basic (values of " being related to " these concepts), and which depict the D of the element as used in its TT property/B Matter.There is no the attribute of TT.i and be expected the attribute of all TT.p without their combination yet --- otherwise, the TT.i, The combination is expected TT.p¹⁴⁾.Note that any attribute can be viewed as binary concept, and e.g., any D attribute of TT.p (see below).

There are the relevant X.i of NC to X) .n) .n " notional modification, 1-cM " are defined as the X.i) TS or U of .n Modification, it is intended to so that X.i) .n/mod (1-cM)antsX) .n (referring to¹⁴⁾I.A.4 and I.B.1 chapters and sections).Therefore, if to two The attribute X.i of system) .n execution 1-cM, then its value is switched.If PTR'sANCMatrix is independently of plcs (referring to I.A.5 chapter Section), then its attribute X.i) any 1-cM of any of .n is also referred to as " independently of plcs ".Identical arguement also results in 1-cM is quantified as " independently of pmgp "¹⁴⁾。

Axiom: the 1-cM for constructing the attribute of TT.i needs to create at least one idea.Any such idea is all referred to as It is " supporting 1-cM ".

If its 1-cM is plcs-, independently of pmgp, any idea for supporting 1-cM be all referred to as " plcs-, solely Stand on pmgp ".If belonging to Q for any^plcsPath/^QpmgpThe 1-cM in path, PTR'sANCMatrix is independently of plcs/ independence In pmgp (it is known as priori because TT.p is not yet known at that time,ANCMatrix is also not yet known), then the hair of TT.p Bright people must create the idea of at least one support on the road towards TT.p after it is since prior technique, also, The idea is independently of plcs/ independently of pmgp.This can independently be required for seeking independently of plcs/ independently of the idea of pmgp It looks for TT.p and must be created by him.Therefore, only after finding TT.p, it can just prove that plcs independence/pmgp is independent Property.

Note: after finding TT.p, the prior art passes through its X) .n conclusively extended --- however, nobody was once Being assumed the prior art also by X.i) .n/mod (q-cM) extended, wherein and q-cM belongs to the Q from RS to TT.p^plcsPath /^QpmgpPath.

Supreme law court²⁾Used express the meaning " independent idea " is also known as " creative idea " and cannot indicate in addition to about special Semantic plcs in sharp method and granted patent exclusive right actual effect pmgp's --- that is, about the special of (impliedly) control country Independently of the prior art and therefore two standards of Li Fa legislature/precedent --- and other than idea independently from each other Any other thing (referring to I.B.2 chapters and sections).

Then, the above-mentioned B level for ' 884 PTR is given.Referring still to the technology report of Fig. 2 c to 2e and FTP engineering It accuses #1 (" D level/B level in ' 884 PTR problems "), wherein --- only for the confirmation of redundancy --- following 28 C.k quilts It is shown as clearly and impliedly disclosing by ' 884 patents and related telecommunications technical ability¹⁾.That is: it is in from its D level by TT.p description Its functionally reciprocity B level presentation is now transformed into be predefined by TT.p --- also, in principle, related skill is not required Energy.Therefore, following understanding is unessential: the expression of these B levels (is presented independently of plcs/ independently of pmgp relative to RS The prior art).

Note: it is completely unrelated to be, between certain in these concepts in TT.i with the presence or absence of additional relationships (so that They are dependent on plcs or depend on pmgp): it, which is not present in TT.p, can produce its impliedly disclosed other property, Therefore even also it is distinguished with RS.

D-A) .1 is C.1: " interchanger is the user different from PSN and LSN ",

C.2: " interchanger is generally positioned in network-external ",

C.3: " interchanger knows considered communication connection ",

C.4: " known in second switch ",

C.5: " data transmission (DT) of communication connection is started by PSN ",

C.6: " ' 884 signals can be identified at any time ",

C.7: " ' 884 signals can generate at any time ",

D-A) .2 is C.8: " the first interchanger interior change trigger is well known ",

C.9: " real-time quality of communication connection is DT monitoring ",

C.10: " already existing variation may have mass loss instruction ",

C.11: " transformation of the communication connection only considered ",

D-A) .3 is C.12: " possible variation, in the beginning of PSN data transmission ",

D-A) .4 is C.13: " interchanger has for being connected at least one ISDN access or simulation or mobile electricity The interface of words ",

D-A) .5 is C.14: " DT is got started with call establishment of connection ",

D-A) .6 is C.15: " PSN of interchanger is accessed and LSN access is all permanent and different from each other ",

D-B) .1 is C.16: " any addressable LSN and PSN to be all disabled " is (only for claim to a method It is available, this method claim is immaterial herein),

D-C) .1 is C.17: " PSN access is not needed for establishing LSN connection ",

D-C) .2 is C.18: " user DT does not need to transmit again ",

D-C) .3 is C.19: " the DT time of communication connection was less than 0.5 second ",

D-C) .4 is C.20: " the first interchanger does not need one show begin through PSN and send telephone call data ",

D-C) .5 is C.21: " the first interchanger does not need one show be transformed into LSN in signal detection ",

D-D) .1 is C.22: " the release transformation when at least one of 3 ' 884 monitored events any occurs ' 884 signals ",

D-D) .2 is C.23: " if signal be and only if signal be ' when 884 signal, signal triggering transformation ",

C.24: " ' 884 signals cannot by anyone/anything refuses ",

D-D) .3 is C.25: " ' 884 signals are possible at the beginning of PSN DT ",

C.26: " ' 884 signals only influence considered communication connection ",

C.27: " ' 884 signals do not have any confirmation request ",

C.28: " ' 884 signals can be transparent for two DT users ".

It is identified above C.1 to analyze title to the FSTP for being C.28 B concept B-C.1 to B-C.28 and in I.A.4 chapters and sections The B attribute B-X of introducing) .1 ..., B-X) .28 full name abbreviation.These B attribute/B concept B-X) it is certain with more than in .n D-X) .n is consistent, and other is refining (referring to left edge, their initial entitled A) .1 to D) .3, that is, does not have prefix “D”)。

Following two table is first using full symbol (that is, passing through B-X) the .n identification B attribute explained just now and ": " The value of the B concept of TT.p is identified by " B-C.n=T " later) above table is again illustrated, also, it is complete then to show this The table (e.g., identifying the value of the B concept of TT.1 by " B-C.n=T/F " after ": ") of document i in symbol.

B-A) .1:B-C.1=T,

B-A) .2:B-C.2=T,

B-A) .3:B-C.3=T,

B-A) .4:B-C.4=T,

B-A) .5:B-C.5=T,

B-A) .6:B-C.6=T,

B-A) .7:B-C.7=T,

B-A) .8:B-C.8=T,

B-A) .9:B-C.9=T,

B-A) .10:B-C.10=T,

B-A) .11:B-C.11=T,

B-A) .12:B-C.12=T,

B-A) .13:B-C.13=T,

B-A) .14:B-C.14=T,

B-A) .15:B-C.15=T,

B-B) .1:B-C.16=T,

B-C) .1:B-C.17=T,

B-C) .2:B-C.18=T,

B-C) .3:B-C.19=T,

B-C) .4:B-C.20=T,

B-C) .5:B-C.21=T,

B-D) .1:B-C.22=T,

B-D) .2:B-C.23=T,

B-D) .3:B-C.24=T,

B-D) .4:B-C.25=T,

B-D) .5:B-C.26=T,

B-D) .6:B-C.27=T,

B-D) .7:B-C.28=T,

Above table shows the B level expression to ' 884 TT.p by means of the above B concept, and below table is shown To the description of the B level of TT.1 (referring to showing its D levelANCThe II.C.1 chapters and sections of relationship and introduction to II.C chapters and sections).

B-A.1) .1:B-C.1=F,

B-A.1) .2:B-C.2=T,

B-A.1) .3:B-C.3=T,

B-A.1) .4:B-C.4=T,

B-A.1) .5:B-C.5=T,

B-A.1) .6:B-C.6=F,

B-A.1) .7:B-C.7=F,

B-A.1) .8:B-C.8=F,

B-A.1) .9:B-C.9=F,

B-A.1) .10:B-C.10=F,

B-A.1) .11:B-C.11=T,

B-A.1) .12:B-C.12=F,

B-A.1) .13:B-C.13=F,

B-A.1) .14:B-C.14=F,

B-A.1) .15:B-C.15=F,

B-B.1) .1:B-C.16=F,

B-C.1) .1:B-C.17=F,

B-C.1) .2:B-C.18=F,

B-C.1) .3:B-C.19=F,

B-C.1) .4:B-C.20=F,

B-C.1) .5:B-C.21=F,

B-D.1) .1:B-C.22=F,

B-D.1) .2:B-C.23=F,

B-D.1) .3:B-C.24=F,

B-D.1) .4:B-C.25=F,

B-D.1) .5:B-C.26=T,

B-D.1) .6:B-C.27=F,

B-D.1) .7:B-C.28=F,

Pay attention to, it is unclear that, whether above " F " represents " N " or even B-ANC" C " in the first row of matrix.

11 generally, and the patent and/or document i discussed can handle several X) .n, X.i) .n, that is, it is several when disclosing When TT.p, TT.i.Again, it is assumed that in order to simple, there is only individually such TT.p, a TT.i, therefore, X) .n and X.i) .n --- it is simple that FSTP analysis test, which is used for common case,.

12 1 X) .n column may can pass through some X.i) " sub- Patent Law " 1-cM of .n is removed (referring to I.B.2.b With I.M chapters and sections), and pass through 2 1-cM carry out 2 X) .n column removal be likely to no longer be " sub- Patent Law ", NNI support not How pipe is independent.

13 all these considerations are only set up, if TT.p is described completely --- and it is available referring to II.A.1.2 Counter-example.

14 for PTR the ANC matrix independently of plcs, if with following term (D prefix/B prefix is omitted, referring to I.A.1 is to I.A.5 chapters and sections) it is indicated:

■ with its TT.p " it is expected that combination, AC " indicate X.i) .n the matrix any combination,

■ " RS⁺" indicate the set of all such AC,<AC>, referred to as relative to " the combination hull of RS " of the matrix (G in see below),

■ is indicated to come from RS with " q-cM "⁺AC q 1-cM set, 0≤q < ∞, that is, " 0-cM " is the non-of the AC Modification,

■ is with " the expected combination of q, q-AC " indicate that there are q-cM to make " q-AC/mod (q-cM)antsTT.p's " is any AC, q >=0,

" plcs height, Q of the ■ with TT.p relative to RS^plcs" indicate the smallest such q, in RS⁺In be not present q-AC In the case where be defined as ∞,

" plcs of the ■ with TT.p relative to RS^xxxHighly, Q^plcs/xxx" indicate that the smallest q, xxx indicate following 4 option C In one, " standard " be default value,

" pmgp height, Q of the ■ with TT.p relative to RS^pmgp" indicate the smallest q, if pmgp is fully understood.

If for any q-AC and q-cM, q=0,1,2 ..., relationship " q-AC/mod (q-cM)anticipates TT.p” It can be referred to as:

A. it " does not contradict ", if " q-AC/mod (q-cM)not-contradicts(involved in TT.p or q-AC Any TT.i) " (see below).

B. " holding of element integrality ", if the disclosure of which is " element direction ", i.e. " an element then a member Element " (see below).

C. " free ", " standard ", if it does not abide by limitation any of A and B (4 in total " plcs option " In limitation A and B).

To A: in the precedent of certain Supreme Judicial Courts, the TT.i that is contradicted in some way with TT.p --- especially exist In the case that TT.i carries out its mainfold --- it to be excluded from any AC, such as TT.i, therefore, " teaching " technical staff is " remote From " construction TT.p (referring to I.B.2 chapters and sections).

To B: all Supreme Judicial Courts precedent requirement :) q-AC expection relationship must not be by choose X.i) .n member Element X) .n equity different TT.i TT.p " arbitrarily choosing "；And :) only small amounts of document i is combined into arbitrarily Q-AC (e.g., i≤4 or 5, it appears that including the document i in relation to technical ability, referring to I.B.2.b chapters and sections).

To C: according to " the Q of PTR^plcs/free", " Q can be obtained by FSTP analysis method^plcs/XXX" it is other 3 value.

Footnote is in D into E continuing with " the D level/B level " of " pmgp " and " creativeness " and " plcs independence/pmgp Independence " express the meaning between interesting correlation.It again appears at all provided by the FSTP analysis by PTR in F These mental assistances it is invalid, if technical ability is applied to by law court's refusal in the very early stage of the explanation of its TT.p Answer technical problem and answer these problems by intuition --- that is, F is again illustrated (referring to II.A.1.2): by answering Which unreasonable fallacy the fabulous Supreme Judicial Court can be dragged in for compulsory common sense with technical ability, and, by the B of PTR problem Level is presented provided redundancy and can be prevented by the fallacy.G, which finally explains search, can be creativeness.

To D: instead of can be what abstract point to ideal redundancy provided by the B level presentation by PTR problem Analysis --- the D level for adding it to problem presents so which accesses the analysis of integrality and correctness and B level Plcs independence, as the presentation that a small amount of redundant bit is added to byte makes it possible to check its globality --- D presented Chapters and sections are illustrated by simple example

The why such redundancy of ■ is not herein unique (as in coding theory) yet, that is, selection is normal And it is highly useful,

■ searches for optimal D level and significantly improves understanding for the PTR problem discussed, is ask with being concerned about by it at it Asking proves that the B level is presented and supports the knowledge of the basic science of the TT.p of PTR with common sense --- may also be had using certain Technical ability is closed, as explained in following " to E ".

The example also explains (together with " to E "): which kind of FSTP analyzer provides at this stage and supports.

Simple example is: PTR, main subject matter field are detector comprising:

The TT.p of ■ antenna is the plane square for the conducting wire that edge length is n*3.1415cm, wherein document p is explained Property indicate that the value appropriate of n is (e.g., for scanning the small of small/big existing n well known to existing detection technical ability / big value),

■ includes the RS of the only prior art of single TT.i, is also the flat plane antenna as conducting wire, is bent into parallel four Side shape, and length in 1cm between 20cm.

PTR problem (plcs problem) is: what TT.p is relative to the plcs height of TT.i --- started with n=1?

TT.p is relative to the first plcs limitation of TT.i: the range of their the general concept LBS of the latter (=TT.p, The length of the Essential Edges of TT.i) it must accurately change 1-cM to 3.1415cm.However, for remaining, TT.p and TT.i with Upper D level present be not to say that must force TT.i parallelogram how many other 1-cM (LBS=3.1514cm) so that Them are obtained it can be anticipated that TT.p squares (LSB=3.1415cm).Therefore, it is necessary to by the other common TT.p concept of identification/ The redundancy of addition common sense/general science B level is presented to the D level of PTR problem for TT.i concept.Common sense/common it is several He Xue suggests the B level redundancy that two alternate concepts are presented as PTR problem:

1.) the 2nd TT.p/RS general concept, " side length of parallelogram ", for TT.p antenna have range " < 3.1415>cm ", that is, it is binary, and for TT.i antenna, in the range of "<0.62830>cm ".By 1-cM to larger Range force the former still and cannot make the expected TT.p antenna of TT.i antenna (LBS=3.1415cm), this is because ad infinitum more Remaining parallelogram.In order to realize the expection, it is necessary to force and (pass through 1-cM) to the range of TT.i "<0,180>° " Three TT.p/RS general concepts, " angle of parallelogram ", range are "<90>° ".

2.) the 2nd other TT.p/RS general concept, " shape of parallelogram ", the range " square " of TT.p.The choosing The single 1-cM for realizing TT.i range "<any>" is selected, so that TT.i mentions Ah Buddhist nun Xi'an (LBS=3.1415cm) expected TT.p.

That is, situation 1.) need 3 cM, situation 2.) 2 cM are needed, therefore, TT.p is relative to the plcs height of RS 2 --- situation 2.) in TT.p/RS general concept only pass through common sense/background science from the specific disclosure of PTR obtain.

As the Patent Law of only non-common sense/non-background science invention, when search for this B level is genuine --- and it is For determining Q^plcsEssential intellectual work a part.Specifically, for PTR, from its Q^plcs/freeObtain its Q^{plcs /normal}(or other two Q therebetween^plcs/XXXIn one) only need common sense.Its example results passes through II.A.2.2 chapter Three side's points in section are shown.

This possibly improve and/or even controversial B level search in --- minimum of the TT.p relative to RS Plcs height, independently of the arbitrary collection of the TT.p/RS general concept of plcs --- check that plcs independence is simple.Such as, In both cases, may it is identified/define other concept, such as

■ 1.), range for TT.p with "<3.1415>cm " and have for TT.i "<0, " height of parallelogram " concept of the range of 3.1415 > cm ", and

■ is still " height of the parallelogram " concept defined just now 2.).

However, the other concept can be obtained according to common sense/essential geometry from the above concept automatically by FSTP analyzer, And therefore independently of plcs.Note: if " height of parallelogram " concept in the case of both the above prior to being identified And it is input to FSTP ES, then it can make their conceptual dependency in plcs, that is, unrelated (referring to I.A.5 chapters and sections). Although the concept is not by the Q of PTR^plcs" 2 " are reduced to hereinafter, determined by as before.

In all of these situations, the expection of the property of TT.p/TT.i claimed, disclosure may be it is clear or What person was implied¹⁾。

It is also noted that: by situation 2.) " parallelogram " concept to enrich the other TT.p/RS to TT.p antenna commonly general Read --- that is, to " parallelogram=LBS=n*3.1415cm square, wherein n=1,2,3 ... ", can make All first concepts and its plcs are relied on, and by the Q of PTR^plcsIt is decreased to " 1 " --- do not allow, because it is not It is based only upon common sense/basic geometry, they do not prove any value of the n only determined by related technical ability.

In a word: for technical ability/pmgp independence of PTR, identifying that various possible B levels and access B level make it Concept is independently of plcs and its value Q^plcsMaximum is the common min-max search according to well known to many optimization problems. FSTP expert system belongs to concept for any possible B level of plcs independence and by storing it by automaticly inspecting And they inspection to support the min-max of possible complexity search for, allow them to its user inquiry this Its user is immediately presented to when information.

To E: for PTR problem, determines and show in technical secondary (in Patent Law) semantic fact table of preceding discussion The independent first part of its facts analyzing.Then, mainly discuss and emphasize the second part and most terminal part of the facts analyzing Point, determining technical ability also known as (granted patent exclusive right) actual effect for Q^plcsWhen the influence of the expanded set of-PS, FSTP expert System is also supported by means of first part (referring to I.B.2 chapters and sections).Therefore, FSTP expert system can be able to carry out (partly) automatic It checks for now independently of the remaining Q of plcs^plcsThese pmgp of-AC influence, however, here, its leaf can store this It is a little to influence and its check, so that they are immediately presented to its user when its user inquires the information.

These are influenced independently of D level/B level, because pmgp is unrelated with the difference.

Although PTR problem, which is transformed into the presentation of its B level from its original D level presentation, can increase and technical ability/pmgp For its Q^plcsThe related uncertainty of the influence of-AC, B level can more " technical ability/pmgp load " --- however, it is such not Certainty may be already present in the presentation of its D level.

Eyes front several years: pmgp- and technical ability be limited and can formalized (referring to I.M), therefore, Q^plcsValue can The pmgp of energy reduces the Q that can be pmgp item and limited quantity in any case by limited quantity^plcsAll groups of-AC Close it is limited search in detail it is confirmable.The finiteness cannot become not manageable big: such group of arbitrarily large number Closing namely is counterintuitive generally for the expressing the meaning of pmgp --- because it is assumed to make herein The TT.p of PTR is clear relative to its RS, that is, usually only in considerably less step.

To F: in this regard, it is worth noting that: although related technical ability language level discussed above (referring to I.D chapters and sections) And the implicit disclosure based on technical ability¹⁾The complicated of technical ability/pmgp plcs limitation express the meaning legally in patent It is very important in terms of (claim) understanding of method²⁾, judge to be intended to simply ignore all these claimed " essences It is thin " legal requirement, and usually replace all these clearly expressing the meaning with basis with themselves intuition.It is by it The B level of PTR problem is presented, the clarification of the differentiation of the RS about its prior art of TT.p --- it is typically due to fine reason And present than its D level more " based on technology " --- it has no chance into being noticed in this case by them.That is: although B level ratio D level more clearly discloses the fact that support PTR problem, however, it, which is likely to encounter, to be connect by judge By or only more difficulties for being considered by judge because they, which typically feel everything feelings, to be determined by they are personal It is fixed --- that is, not understanding the meaning of their work.F chapters and sections are used expresses the meaning closer to above-mentioned reasonable term/term expressed the meaning/ Summarise this phenomenon presented in II.A.1.2 chapters and sections.

Defining FSTP user first to the FSTP analysis of PTR problem should be understood that and accurately describe its TT.p --- By means of his trial/basic science understanding and/or the specific technical ability/pmgp of TT.p: disclosing its TT.p's accordingly, with respect to explaining Certain texts, layman can with and about other texts, he can not dependably/step is appropriately carried out.Specifically, no There are trial/basic science when to reach its limitation and the when independent unalterable rules of technical ability.In addition, if law court carries out Following activity, then situation generally becomes chaotic:

■ is firstly, make the clear text of such ' 884 disclosures related with its data transmission technology --- and it is most The earth explains the tolerable delay time in Internet Protocol telephone communication, that is, disclose following situation: they are necessarily less than 0.5 second, also, it gains the initiative by striking first actually by there is clearly disclosed and technically completely new risk indicator Ground accesses connection with traditional PSTN/ISDN and the internet connection of call is replaced to realize the property, prior to its above-mentioned matter Amount --- as explain and/or prove their own technical specialist in face of it is very technical, therefore, highlight its pass Absolutely be in telecommunication technology it is incompetent,

■ however, therefore, have found its be different from it is that technology of its expert is written and it is oral it is duplicate clearly such as For call and therefore after lower situation: the time restriction of the difficulty is absolutely strong for Internet Protocol telephone communication Property processed --- it is strictly confirmed again by him, when being inquired several times during its hearing by law court about the limitation --- will The disclosure of the text as it is non-technical, therefore only by attempting to adjudicate, that is, pass through law court itself.

Therefore, court decision, the Communication terminology utterly established accordingly and expresses the meaning, in addition formally by host country and Foreign standard formulates what group was agreed to²⁰⁾--- i.e. it is desired to which being suitable for the data transferring technique of Internet Protocol telephone communication must exclude greatly In delay in 0.5 second, this was well known according to science in decades, and is therefore described as its TT.p by ' 884 patents Decisive property, this is because its preemptive reaction for being indicated for novel early stage --- can not be understood and be limited TT.p processed, because in internet telephone cell: due to their price advantage, " several seconds " delay time determined exists Be in internet telephone cell it is tolerable, desired opposite things and actually will be become by ignoring ' 884 patents and indicating Met by its data transferring technique.It is clearly indicated, opposes decision --- skill of the technical specialist of their own Art expert approves the correctness of the claimed condition of internet telephone cell --- it is indifferent to, because the decision is non-technical.

If being correctly technically --- to be solved ' the problem of 884 patent be allow in internet telephone cell Occur " several seconds " interruption, clearly and impliedly contradicted with ' 884 specifications and ' 884 claims 8, this also by The technical specialist of law court points out --- several in existing technical literature have been expected ' 884 solutions claimed, It is fremdly required by law court oneself.This generates following problem, law court why therefore do not recognize that this is claimed ' 884 Data transferring technique it is several as expected any one, but (claimed) arguement using apparent property to destroy Germany ' 884 patents --- without any of the improved technical disclosure for referring to ' 884 specifications.This is with (institute Claim) common sense replace possible result good example, elaborate PTR problem be transformed into B level presentation --- by strong The explanation EPC for compeling patent is obeyed.

However, even if law court is not attempt to such judgement --- therefore pretend to be fully understood by problem or its mistake Solution notices very important a part of the text of specification and claims as it is simply denied --- In fact, being not inessential to the answer of the integrity issue of understanding and/or the description of problem.More than in subsequent paragraph Simple example shows why situation can be in this way.

To G: the G chapters and sections of footnote 14 are finally clarified when, and TT.p indicates that the RS relative to TT.i is non-aobvious And be clear to, if TT.p only checks attribute X.i) all combinations of .n, any one is directed to all possible concept value --- It is assumed that the set that all such references are specifically combined is limited, also, the expected TT.p of wherein at least one, therefore quilt Referred to as " ideal " such combination.

Therefore, pmgp can make any TT.p be it will be apparent that if it is for preferably combining and right It is the detailed search of the set for its inspection, the advantages of there is no relative to RS and/or the technical ability as disclosed in document p. That is: for indicate TT.p be it is non-obvious, the detailed search of the set must be avoided for ideal combination, and/ It or must include being understood relative at least one of RS and/or technical ability advantage by document p to the inspection of the combination of the set Ground impliedly discloses.Two requirements can be satisfied for any amount of combination and therefore indicate that TT.p is non-aobvious And it is clear to.The example of such TT.p is:

■ TT.p1 is first carried out to the set (including n²⁴A combination, n >=2) certain rearrangements, and therefore need Check ideal combination, such as preceding n⁶A combination, although the detailed search to it may need n²⁴Secondary inspection, or

■ TT.p2 avoids the initial rearrangement to TT.p1, but by the detailed casual inspection for it come Find ideal combination, that is, by may be until n²⁴Secondary inspection, now, inspection be modified to as very fast or relatively inexpensive or Person is nondestructive perhaps ... or

■ TT.p3 can be based on TT.p1 and TT.p2 about the variation for making it possible to combine its advantage.

In all of these situations, TT.p has been based on the ideal combination of at large search in some set, still Now, requirements above is satisfied to indicate that it is non-obvious.

15

E.W.Dijkstra in'Teaching and Learning Formal Methods',by C.N.Dean et Al., 1996: " so-called ' natural language ' be for the purpose that it is created for it is fabulous, as wanting rough, to say Joke, to swindle or to fall in love (and the theoretician of Literary Criticism even can wherein with content without Close), however, its it must be appreciated that ground be when handling very intricate situation it is at all inadequate, these situations such as make laws, Inevitably occur in the activity such as arbitration, mathematics or programming ".

16 here, abbreviation " plcs ", " pmgp " and " NNI " (and its modification) technically and legally carries accurately Meaning.Using term --- " creative height " such as related with invention, " innovative amount ", " is created " innovative height " Make the size of degree ", " independent idea ", " innovative idea " ... --- its meaning usually in some way design plcs or pmgp Or NNI, it is how accurate without explaining --- when, legislation and/or precedent do not know the accuracy 15 unfortunately), therefore generate Problem.

The initial data transmission for being used to establish network connection in 17 ISDN²⁰⁾--- it is not needed in packet-switching It is established in network, is permanently present network connection because being actually connected between its all DTE: the initial data transmission It is still not belonging to call or real time communication connection, not yet starts that independent " phone is exhaled in any call at it Cry foundation " in the case where process.Initial packet switched data transmission of the same situation in the communication connection considered It establishes for the first time and V.120 connects or be also suitable in the case where obtaining the access for the first time to network.Referring still to footnote 6 and 7.

18 note that the text of ' 884 specifications " can actually use any data switching networks ... at this according to EPC In the range of invention " it explicitly discloses: one of the novelty of ' 884 TT.p is, can combineANY(it can by LSN Whichever to be) it usesANYPSN (whichever it can be).That is: the group based on specific LSN Yu specific PSN The TT.i of conjunction is absolutely uncorrelated herein, because of it does not disclose that the novelty of ' 884 TT.p.

This particularly with any claimed ' 884 properties that cannot disclose TT.i in some way or which TT.i very It is set up to the expection document i contradicted with ' 884 property.These are, for example, to concentrate to discuss and provide LSN and PSN and therefore All document i for the ISDN of network specifically combined generally are claimed dependent on two.

In addition, the ISDN that such document i shows them independently of one another, which is concentrated, discusses expected ' 884 inventions of exclusion:

(1) ISDN is limited to be used only as line exchange network by ' 884 patents, passes through beginning:

Zero " if ISDN access network exists, using ISDN-B channel as data channel " (col.4:61-62), with And

Zero " therefore data packet is sent by B channel " (col.4:62-63).

(2) it is shown as packet-switching or being sorted in ' 884 Fig. 1 to 4 for line exchange: in ' 884 TT.p, " PSTN/POTS " is the synonym of " ISDN ".Therefore, because term PSTN/POTS typically represents line exchange network, so this Applied to term ISDN.

(3) col.9:8-10 is clear: the basic status of the first interchanger provides, and initially " passes through IP interchanger 72 Transmit data in internet " --- and therefore willLine switching equipment 73Exclude the purposes transmitted in packet-switching it Outside, this may be necessary for the packet-switching function of using ISDN to access is as packet-switched network.

(4) claim 1 and 2 clearly assumes that their two interchangers can be handed in their data packet considered In the case where changing data transmission, or line switching network even is converted into the case where total failure of packet-switched network Network --- this cannot in ISDN access.Therefore understands that " ISDN access packet-switched network " total failure In the case of, it is impossible to realize the limitation 1.e in two claims), 2.d), this is because ISDN packet-switching function can be with It is required that being used for this --- that is, isdn signaling order SETUP is transmitted for the packet-switching function by ISDN, referring to Col.9:46-47 --- it cannot be available after such case.

(5) the figure a) of claim 1 is technically cost wisdom, and absolutely not meaning, if ISDN is accessed It is considered as line exchange network of the invention (the first interchanger must access the exchange network), and its packet-switching function Be considered as its packet-switched network: therefore, generally also access should in the case where its isdn access for the first interchanger It is assumed that packet-switched network.Therefore, connection --- a) according to limitation --- is established by ISDN and the data packet of hypothesis is handed over The connection of the access point of oneself of switching network may technically be entirely absurdity, assume as established domain by ISDN Such connection of the remote access point of " ISDN packet-switched network ": if in both cases --- they are in technology On completely it will be recognized that, therefore can be pathology case --- any advantage may not be brought by establishing such connection, and Inevitably bring additional cost (it can be reduced by using packet-switched network).

(6) international standard being only responsible for for ISDN, ITU-T (=international transport alliance --- telecommunications) and its related mark Standard, " motion is H.323 " explicitly define ISDN as line exchange network (such as " switched circuit network --- SCN ").That is, ' 884 priority dates, the clarified ISDN of ITU-T is line exchange network, therefore negatively (it passes through nearly 80 years decision problem For early stage some come argue disputablely), the packet-switching function of ISDN whether can permit is referred to as data packet friendship Switching network.

19 referring still to II.A.1.2 chapters and sections

20 these be term/table of the related common skill of --- that is, " ISO OSI Reference Model " --- in terms of telecommunications Meaning is that --- since it becomes to exist --- the related standards setting organizations of all international and nationals are (that is, all industry ISO, institute There is telecommunications industry CCITT/ITU-T, all electrical equipment IEEE's, all good silly subject research IETF's, US ANSI, German DIN, Britain BSI, French AFNOR ...) one and only one usually receive it is terminological/express the meaning on basis. Therefore, the purposes of these terms in ' 884 patents/express the meaning is self-evident, unless it is otherwise by clearly and clearly It points out.Following opinion of the extensive consistency of the country/international body based on them: the language of layman is used in field of telecommunicationsNo It canAvoid ground confusion reigned--- as produced the term as " connection " as its diversity and with critically important details Layman the meaning contradicted expressed the meaning, this will be explained below.

Note: such OSI Reference Model is international standard, and therefore its Natural English text is meant that related The horizontal meaning provided of the professional level (referring to I.D chapters and sections) of technical staff.That is, the term of OSI Reference Model/expressing the meaning does not have Be selected to be grasped at once by layman, however be selected to provide to those skilled in the art usually receive/necessary table Basis in meaning.

It is described in US telecommunications patent specification, using only existing/terminology that the country is agreed to/in the world on expressing the meaning Telecommunications reference model --- and, for explaining its technical ability when using telecom term/express the meaning --- it can make with description wherein It is equally strange with " the unabridged dictionary of Webster ".That is: purposes of the ISO OSI Reference Model in ' 884 patents is due to skill It can be self-evident.

Therefore, express the meaning " transmission " indicate the entire data transmission of call --- and should not be mixed with " transmission data " Conjunction ((referring to II.A.1.2 chapters and sections) in the communication connection considered, handles the details of the transmission.This is then in feelings appropriate It is prominent to avoid misunderstanding with capitalization in the footnote under condition.

More accurately: the practical transmission that the content that " transmission " includes is far above data is somebody's turn to do, e.g., wherein further including " from data The variation ... that packet switch is exchanged to line " (referring to col.9:43-52).This together with col.9:37-41 clarified " transmission " with communicate Between connection closely express the meaning on relationship, and, the variation of monitored " transmission "Be due to and only influenceIt is examined The communication connection of worry (otherwise, line exchange link may overload, it is apparent that can not achieve its expected real-time quality).Referring to The available other limitation for " transmission " of II.A.1.2 chapters and sections.

As for expressing the meaning for nonexpondable term " connection " herein: there is no the universal meanings of the term.It expresses the meaning logical It is often dependant on the context of the term identified with its prefix.In field of telecommunications, term " communication connection " represents two communication parties " abstract communications applications association " (referring to the first page of the above OSI Reference Model) --- therefore its title.It belongs to osi layer 7 (=L7), that is, it is that " abstract application connection " is also known as " L7 connection ".In case of the telephone call, communication connection is to exhale Between the abstract model of the telephone set of the person of crying and calleeAbstract telephonic communication association.Its " presence " for becoming --- as Being associated between the phone model of caller and the phone model of callee --- accurately in the terminal side of caller, in quilt When the address of the terminal of caller is identified.

" creation " existing connection indicates execution, and its is abstractTechnical realizationProcess, this include may only its change Presence after activity.Fuzzy term " calling " colloquial style earth's surface of the first step of creation also known as " foundation " communication connection Show.Technical staff understand the abstract Local resource requirement to be satisfied technical details and will be during call setup The consistency realized between terminal/callee terminal of caller.Calling, its communication connection can enter --- After " establishment stage " --- in its " service stage " and actually arrive in its " termination phase ".In all stages, calling It is transmitted it is required that executing certain terminal to terminal data between its (it is communicated to connect) terminal, passes through " transmission " completely.

That is, the communication connection of calling is the connection of terminal-to-terminal service, and number can be used in the segmentation of its switch-to-switch According to packet switch or line exchange so-called " network connection " (also known as " L3 connection ").In field of telecommunications, " technology is talked about " is before these Sew --- " L7 ", " application "/" communication ", " network "/" L3 ", " link "/" L2 " ... --- can continually be ignored because They are all anyway clear for the technical staff of the communications field.

Therefore: delayEvent(indicate to postpone forever and how to become to know wherein to abstract from the first interchanger) can To occur in many cases, and present in several positions in monitored " transmission ", its communication connection --- and It does not need to be generated by packet-switched network at all, but can be generated outside it.In fact, possible such event The example of reason is:

The first interchanger of ■ is finished as needed when using the packet-switched network for being used for considered communication connection Cushion space (e.g., for being packaged to the data from telephone set), or other resources have been used up for this purpose (as suitable When compression/de-compression resource), or data packet cannot be transmitted to packet-switched network (e.g., someone pushes away plug To it, perhaps it has gone through certain internal control limitation) or have found not about by the received data of second switch Acceptable delay, or

■ second switch, which has, is identified for the first interchangerResource mismatch problemIn one (technical staff is not It needs to explain how to realize the discovery).

Any of these events can appear in communication connection after beginning " transmission ".That is: pendente lite is special Benefit does not consider the existing period prior to communication connection definitely.

21 VAZVAN are related in no instanceCall.He is related to really:

■ phone --- at this moment, continually it is used as data modem unit holding equipment, such as by means of phone and this Therefore very popular " acoustic coupler " between a little modems --- and therefore also disclose and be necessarily used for them Other technical condition (" fixed network ", 9:29 page, or separated with " radio unit " " data outage fills Set ", 13:4-5 pages).However, one word all can satisfy technical the wanting substantially by following setting disclose these It asks:

Zero data processing data transmission technology (main feature: not retaining dislocation or data-bag lost, therefore, if Properly, then data based on TCP data segment are transmitted and are repeated, thus be excluded that meeting the requirement of real time of telephonic communication) so that It is also suitble to:

Zero telephone call data transmission technology (main feature: signal delay < 0.5 second, therefore usually not data transmission weight It is multiple, however, depending on the circumstances, there is the receiving to remaining dislocation and/or data-bag lost, that is, unconditionally meet phone The requirement of real time of communication --- with therefore establish data transportation requirements antithesis, as it is preceding put sentence described in >).

In other words: only referring to a possibility that being also related to phone in the realization of MMT/DMT-VAZVAN anywhere not It is related in addition to any other content in following --- it is not that phone is integrated into more than two data transmission technologies and diverging number The disclosure of ' 884 real-time Data Transmissions is convenient for according to transmission technology.

■ " calling terminated in a mobile station " und " calling from mobile station ", page 19:20 and 33, still, he does not have One word, which discloses these callings, can be call.On the contrary, only generally the disclosed explanation to these callings is: they are " data call " (have in such as page 12 several places or 13:4-5 pages "DataTerminal installation "), also, this correspond to feel at this time The case where interest and its feasibility are expected.In other words: only referring to " calling " so not is any kind of following disclosure: its It may include " call ", compared with the data processing data transmission technology only referred to by VAZVAN, significantly different electricity Talk about communication data transmission technology.

That is: his variation is not claimed in VAZVAN --- per arbitrary packet-switched network, exhaled relative to phone Line exchange network work (' 884 transformation be also such) in crying --- and it is practically without and works in this way, such as with On in vii) and viii) shown in.

Claims (16)

1. a kind of for managing to the claim of patent or any other creative activity (and the support claim Technical teaching TT.p) relative at least one document i (and the technical teaching TT.i for supporting at least one document i) Analysis method, PTR indicates and the patent or creative activity and the patent or the claim of creative activity And the set of the related information of these documents i (and described technical teaching TT.p and TT.i), wherein the user of the method It is interacted by the application of computer system and the method,

Wherein, the application

■ passes through the various interfaces of the various memory portions of the computer system, weight during executing step (a) to (e) Information, the various memory portions of Xiang Suoshu computer system are read from the various memory portions of the computer system again Middle write-in information, the various memory portion copy informations of Xiang Suoshu computer system or from each of the computer system The kind various memory portions of memory portion/Xiang Suoshu computer system/in the various memory portions of the computer system Information converting in point,

Wherein, the information includes following item:

The first category of ■, first category are given by the user, including identify or describe the PTR at least one or A kind of natural science rule or a kind of NPS or a kind of information of technical ability, first category input to the meter by the user Calculation machine system, and

The second category of ■, that is, the execution of following (a) to (e), the step of second category passes through the method (a) to (d) come It generates, and

Wherein, using the method includes executing any of described step (a) to (e) at least one times,

(a) at least one first category is compiled at least one technical brass tacks of the TT.p or TT.i, as (a) item,

(b) the technical brass tacks of at least one TT.i is compiled, as (b) item, wherein at least one described TT.i Technical brass tacks discloses the TT.p brass tacks of the equity of the technical brass tacks of at least one described TT.i,

(c) at least one combination of the technical brass tacks for the TT.i for assuming expected TT.p is compiled, as (c) ,

(d) at least one given correlation between project is compiled, as (d) item, or between project At least one given correlation carries out comment or respectively while executing at least one in the step (a) to (e) The other opinion obtained is commented on, and

(e) all such second categories are input in the information, and defined between all items in the information All correlations --- the correlation as indicated by the user, so that

By showing the information and the item and other all such correlations of the item to the user, pass through The method automatically and is immediately replied to any inquiry in the information.

2. a kind of for managing to the claim of patent or any other creative activity (and the support claim Technical teaching TT.p) relative at least one document i (and the technical teaching TT.i for supporting at least one document i) Analysis method, PTR indicates and the patent or creative activity and the patent or the claim of creative activity And the set of the related information of these documents i (and described technical teaching TT.p and TT.i), wherein the user of the method It is interacted by the application of computer system and the method,

■ passes through the various interfaces of the various memory portions of the computer system, weight during executing step (a) to (e) Information, the various memory portions of Xiang Suoshu computer system are read from the various memory portions of the computer system again Middle write-in information, the various memory portion copy informations of Xiang Suoshu computer system or from each of the computer system The kind various memory portions of memory portion/Xiang Suoshu computer system/in the various memory portions of the computer system Information converting in point,

Wherein, the information includes following item:

The first category of ■, first category are given by the user, including identify or describe the PTR at least one or A kind of natural science rule or a kind of NPS or a kind of information of technical ability, first category input to the meter by the user Calculation machine system, and

The second category of ■, that is, the execution of following (a) to (e), the step of second category passes through the method (a) to (d) come It generates, and

Wherein, using the method includes executing any of described step (a) to (e) at least one times, that is,

(a) at least one first category is compiled at least one technical formal basic thing of the TT.p or TT.i It is real, as (a) item,

(b) at least one technical formal basic TT.i fact is compiled, as (b) item, wherein described at least one A technical formal basic TT.i fact discloses pair of at least one technical formal basic TT.i fact Deng TT.p it is true,

(c) to the basic of the PTR or semantically or technical secondary or final/non-audit in actual effect At least one of formal fact is compiled, as (c) item, wherein described the fact is that based on (c) for assuming expected TT.p The formal expression of item combination,

(d) at least one correlation between project is compiled, as (d) item, or at least one between project A given correlation carries out comment respectively or obtains while executing at least one in the step (a) to (e) Other opinion is commented on, and

(e) all such second categories are input in the information, and defined between all items in the information All correlations --- the correlation as indicated by the user, so that

By all information from the item to the user of the method and the item and other all such phases that show Mutual relation automatically and is immediately replied by the method to any inquiry in the information.

3. method according to claim 1 or 2, wherein at least one of the information:

Precedent can be used for the application and/or is input in the application during the execution of the application by ■, and/or

The result of at least one of described step (a) to (e) is presented in ■.

4. according to claim 1 to method described in one in 3, wherein execute step (b) and (c) and obey in following limitation At least one: the expected combination (q-AC) of any q is noncontradictory or maintains the integrality of element or as NLS gives 's.

5. obey following limitation: the step (a) of the method is extremely according to claim 1 to method described in one in 4 At least one of (e) it or all interactively execute with the FSTP user and/or itself is automatically carried out by the FSTP.

6. obeying following limitation: in the step (a) to (e) extremely to method described in one in 5 according to claim 1 Few one execution is presented in the D level that the TT.p/TT.i is also known as the brass tacks of TT set or the presentation of B level is enterprising Row.

7. obeying as follows to method described in one in 6 to definite limitation according to claim 1: being presented on the FSTP analysis At least one of period input or output.

8. obey following limitation: the method can be completed given according to claim 1 to method described in one in 7 The q-CM to q '-cM claimed, so that the method modifies certain q '-AC to be expected TT.p, alternatively, the method is able to demonstrate that Such completion is not present in the case where q '≤given value.

9. a kind of for managing to the claim of patent or any other creative activity (and the support claim Technical teaching TT.p) relative at least one document i (and the technical teaching TT.i for supporting at least one document i) Analysis equipment, PTR indicates and the patent or creative activity and the patent or the claim of creative activity And the set of the related information of these documents i (and described technical teaching TT.p and TT.i), wherein the user of the equipment It is interacted by the application of computer system and the method,

■ passes through the various interfaces of the various memory portions of the computer system, weight during executing step (a) to (e) Information, the various memory portions of Xiang Suoshu computer system are read from the various memory portions of the computer system again Middle write-in information, the various memory portion copy informations of Xiang Suoshu computer system or from each of the computer system The kind various memory portions of memory portion/Xiang Suoshu computer system/in the various memory portions of the computer system Information converting in point,

Wherein, the information includes following item:

The first category of ■, first category are given by the user, including identify or describe the PTR at least one or A kind of natural science rule or a kind of NPS or a kind of information of technical ability, first category input to the meter by the user Calculation machine system, and

The second category of ■, that is, the execution of following (a) to (e), the step of second category passes through the method (a) to (d) come It generates, and

It wherein, include executing any of described step (a) to (e) at least one times using the equipment,

(a) by least one, the first is compiled at least one technical brass tacks of the TT.p or TT.i, as (a) item,

(b) the technical brass tacks of at least one TT.i is compiled, as (b) item, wherein at least one described TT.i Technical brass tacks discloses the TT.p brass tacks of the equity of the technical brass tacks of at least one described TT.i,

(c) at least one combination of the technical brass tacks for the TT.i for assuming expected TT.p is compiled, as (c) ,

(d) at least one given correlation between project is compiled, as (d) item, or between project At least one given correlation carries out comment or respectively while executing at least one in the step (a) to (e) The other opinion obtained is commented on, and

(e) all such second categories are input in the information, and defined between all items in the information All correlations --- the correlation as indicated by the user, so that

By showing the information and the item and other all such correlations of the item to the user, pass through The method automatically and is immediately replied to any inquiry in the information.

10. a kind of, for managing, to the claim of patent or any other creative activity, (and the support right is wanted The technical teaching TT.p asked) (and support the technical teaching of at least one document i relative at least one document i TT.i the equipment of analysis), PTR are indicated and the patent or creative activity and the patent or the right of creative activity It is required that and the related information of these documents i (and described technical teaching TT.p and TT.i) set, wherein the equipment User is interacted by the application of computer system and the method,

■ passes through the various interfaces of the various memory portions of the computer system, weight during executing step (a) to (e) Information, the various memory portions of Xiang Suoshu computer system are read from the various memory portions of the computer system again Middle write-in information, the various memory portion copy informations of Xiang Suoshu computer system or from each of the computer system The kind various memory portions of memory portion/Xiang Suoshu computer system/in the various memory portions of the computer system Information converting in point,

Wherein, the information includes following item:

The first category of ■, first category are given by the user, including identify or describe the PTR at least one or A kind of natural science rule or a kind of NPS or a kind of information of technical ability, first category input to the meter by the user Calculation machine system, and

The second category of ■, that is, the execution of following (a) to (e), the step of second category passes through the method (a) to (d) come It generates, and

It wherein, include executing any of described step (a) to (e) at least one times using the equipment, that is,

(a) at least one first category is compiled at least one technical formal basic thing of the TT.p or TT.i It is real, as (a) item,

(b) at least one technical formal basic TT.i fact is compiled, as (b) item, wherein described at least one A technical formal basic TT.i fact discloses pair of at least one technical formal basic TT.i fact Deng TT.p it is true,

(c) to the basic of the PTR or semantically or technical secondary or final/non-audit in actual effect At least one of formal fact is compiled, as (c) item, wherein described the fact is that based on (c) for assuming expected TT.p The formal expression of item combination,

(d) at least one correlation between project is compiled, as (d) item, or at least one between project A given correlation carries out comment respectively or obtains while executing at least one in the step (a) to (f) Other opinion is commented on, and

(e) all such second categories are input in the information, and defined between all items in the information All correlations --- the correlation as indicated by the user, so that

By all information from the item to the user of the equipment and the item and other all such phases that show Mutual relation automatically and is immediately replied by the method to any inquiry in the information.

11. equipment according to claim 9 or 10, wherein at least one of the information:

Precedent can be used for the application and/or is input in the application during the execution of the application by ■, and/or

The result of at least one of described step (a) to (e) is presented in ■.

12. according to equipment described in one in claim 9 to 11, wherein execute step (b) and (c) and obey following limitation At least one of: the expected combination (q-AC) of any q be noncontradictory or maintain element integrality or as NLS to Fixed.

13. obeying following limitation: the step (a) of the method according to equipment described in one in claim 9 to 12 It all execute at least one of (e) or interactively with the FSTP user and/or is automatically held by the FSTP itself Row.

14. obeying following limitation: in the step (a) to (e) according to equipment described in one in claim 9 to 13 The execution of at least one is on the D level that the TT.p/TT.i is also known as the brass tacks of TT set is presented or B level is presented It carries out.

15. obeying as follows to definite limitation according to equipment described in one in claim 9 to 14: being presented on the FSTP points At least one for inputting or exporting during analysis.

16. obey following limitation: the equipment can be completed to give according to equipment described in one in claim 9 to 15 The q-CM claimed to q '-cM so that apparatus modifications the q '-AC to be to be expected TT.p, alternatively, the method is able to demonstrate that Such completion is not present in the case where q '≤given value.