On Jun 16, 7:02=A0pm, Chris Abele <ccab...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> Weng Tianxiang wrote:
> > On Jun 16, 8:51 am, rickman <gnu...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> On Jun 16, 9:34 am, Weng Tianxiang <wtx...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> >>> On Jun 15, 9:41 pm, rickman <gnu...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>>> On Jun 15, 1:39 pm, Weng Tianxiang <wtx...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>>>> On Jun 15, 9:23 am, OutputLogic <evgen...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>>>>> You can try to go to USPTO database and lookup the history of this
> >>>>>> patent application.
> >>>>>> It's not under the patent search, but under "http://www.uspto.gov"=
->
> >>>>>> "Patents" -> "view in PAIR" -> "public PAIR".
> >>>>>> This database contains a complete history of the patent, including=
the
> >>>>>> correspondence with patent examiners, etc.
> >>>>>> Also, can you post the patent application number.
> >>>>>> - outputlogic
> >>>>>>http://outputlogic.com
> >>>>> Hi OutputLogic,
> >>>>> Thank you for your information.
> >>>>> I had searched the website before I posed this message and got the
> >>>>> error information:
> >>>>> "Sorry, the entered Application Number "10/718968" is not available=
.
> >>>>> The number may have been incorrectly typed, or assigned to an
> >>>>> application
> >>>>> that is not yet available for public inspection."
> >>>>> I don't know why I got the error message.
> >>>>> 10/718968 is available from reference literature in the invention:
> >>>>> "Programmable Logic Device Having Complex Logic Blocks with Improve=
> >>>>> Weng
> >>>> 7,394,287 is the patent number. =A0It works for me at the USPTO. =A0=
What
> >>>> is the number you are searching for?
> >>>> Rick- Hide quoted text -
> >>>> - Show quoted text -
> >>> Hi Rick,
> >>> I have tried to find the text and its drawings of patent application
> >>> "Logic Cell
> >>> Supporting Addition of Three Binary Words" filed on Nov. 21, 2003, US
> >>> application number 10/718968, but it must pay to get its context from
> >>> USPTO, even though it was in public domain about 6 years ago.
> >>> Can you help get the context and drawings from USPTO for me?
> >>> Weng
> >> Where did you get the above info? =A0That does not appear to be a vali=
d
> >> document number. =A0It needs to have 11 digits where the first four
> >> appear to be the year.
> >> I searched on "Three Binary Words" in the title and came up with
> >> nothing.
>
> >> I did search on this for patents and found this one which I think is
> >> interesting... maybe this is why the adder is just a plus sign with a
> >> circle... 4,783,757. =A0Note that the owner is Intel, not Altera.
>
> >> Rick
>
> >> Rick- Hide quoted text -
>
> >> - Show quoted text -
>
> > Hi Rick,
> > I got the number from the patent "Programmable Logic Device Having
> > Complex Logic Blocks with Improved Logic Cell Functionality"
> > in its page 1 under "Other publications".
> >http://www.google.com/patents/about?id=3D5yyrAAAAEBAJ&dq=3Dpatent:739428=
7...
>
> > Here is an email I sent to USPTO for confirmation and its response:
> > Hi,
> > I want to research patent application"Logic Cell Supporting Addition
> > of Three Binary Words." U.S. Application Number 10/718,968, filed
> > November 21, 2003.
>
> > It should have been published long ago and in public domain.
>
> > Please tell how to find the patent application.
>
> > Thank you.
>
> > Weng
>
> > Hello
>
> > The status of the application is
> > 93 /NOTICE OF ALLOWANCE MAILED -- APPLICATION RECEIVED IN OFFICE OF
> > PUBLICATIONS.
> > Thank you have a great day. Agent 31
>
> > I don't know what it means.
>
> > Weng
>
> I'm confused: the Google page you linked to has a "Download PDF" button
> which gets you the full 19 page patient. =A0There's also a link for "View
> patient at USPTO" which takes you directly to the page for patient
> number 7,394,287 at the USPTO site. =A0So what is it that you're looking =
for?
>
> Chris- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -
Hi Chris,
You have to download full patent papers to get the idea that the
patent application "Logic Cell Supproting Addition of Three Binary
Words" has not been approved for last 6.5 years.
In the link I listed there is no the reference about the patent
application. When you download the patent 7,394,287, in its page 1
there is an item named "OTHER PUBLICATION". The first paper listed
under the item is the patent application "Logic Cell Supproting
Addition of Three Binary Words" which applied on November 21, 2003
from where I've learned that the "Logic Cell Supproting Addition of
Three Binary Words" has not been approved for last 6.5 years after I
searched for the patent application name through USPTO patent website.
Weng
Reply by Chris Abele●June 16, 20092009-06-16
Chris Abele wrote:
> Weng Tianxiang wrote:
>> On Jun 16, 8:51 am, rickman <gnu...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> On Jun 16, 9:34 am, Weng Tianxiang <wtx...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>> On Jun 15, 9:41 pm, rickman <gnu...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>> On Jun 15, 1:39 pm, Weng Tianxiang <wtx...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>> On Jun 15, 9:23 am, OutputLogic <evgen...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>> You can try to go to USPTO database and lookup the history of this
>>>>>>> patent application.
>>>>>>> It's not under the patent search, but under
>>>>>>> "http://www.uspto.gov" ->
>>>>>>> "Patents" -> "view in PAIR" -> "public PAIR".
>>>>>>> This database contains a complete history of the patent,
>>>>>>> including the
>>>>>>> correspondence with patent examiners, etc.
>>>>>>> Also, can you post the patent application number.
>>>>>>> - outputlogic
>>>>>>> http://outputlogic.com
>>>>>> Hi OutputLogic,
>>>>>> Thank you for your information.
>>>>>> I had searched the website before I posed this message and got the
>>>>>> error information:
>>>>>> "Sorry, the entered Application Number "10/718968" is not available.
>>>>>> The number may have been incorrectly typed, or assigned to an
>>>>>> application
>>>>>> that is not yet available for public inspection."
>>>>>> I don't know why I got the error message.
>>>>>> 10/718968 is available from reference literature in the invention:
>>>>>> "Programmable Logic Device Having Complex Logic Blocks with Improved
>>>>>> Logic Cell Functionality", patent number 7,394,287, by Alera from
>>>>>> following
>>>>>> website:http://www.google.com/patents/about?id=5yyrAAAAEBAJ&dq=patent:7394287...
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Weng
>>>>> 7,394,287 is the patent number. It works for me at the USPTO. What
>>>>> is the number you are searching for?
>>>>> Rick- Hide quoted text -
>>>>> - Show quoted text -
>>>> Hi Rick,
>>>> I have tried to find the text and its drawings of patent application
>>>> "Logic Cell
>>>> Supporting Addition of Three Binary Words" filed on Nov. 21, 2003, US
>>>> application number 10/718968, but it must pay to get its context from
>>>> USPTO, even though it was in public domain about 6 years ago.
>>>> Can you help get the context and drawings from USPTO for me?
>>>> Weng
>>> Where did you get the above info? That does not appear to be a valid
>>> document number. It needs to have 11 digits where the first four
>>> appear to be the year.
>>> I searched on "Three Binary Words" in the title and came up with
>>> nothing.
>>>
>>> I did search on this for patents and found this one which I think is
>>> interesting... maybe this is why the adder is just a plus sign with a
>>> circle... 4,783,757. Note that the owner is Intel, not Altera.
>>>
>>> Rick
>>>
>>> Rick- Hide quoted text -
>>>
>>> - Show quoted text -
>>
>> Hi Rick,
>> I got the number from the patent "Programmable Logic Device Having
>> Complex Logic Blocks with Improved Logic Cell Functionality"
>> in its page 1 under "Other publications".
>> http://www.google.com/patents/about?id=5yyrAAAAEBAJ&dq=patent:7394287&as_drrb_ap=q&as_minm_ap=0&as_miny_ap=&as_maxm_ap=0&as_maxy_ap=&as_drrb_is=q&as_minm_is=0&as_miny_is=&as_maxm_is=0&as_maxy_is=
>>
>>
>> Here is an email I sent to USPTO for confirmation and its response:
>> Hi,
>> I want to research patent application"Logic Cell Supporting Addition
>> of Three Binary Words." U.S. Application Number 10/718,968, filed
>> November 21, 2003.
>>
>> It should have been published long ago and in public domain.
>>
>> Please tell how to find the patent application.
>>
>> Thank you.
>>
>> Weng
>>
>> Hello
>>
>> The status of the application is
>> 93 /NOTICE OF ALLOWANCE MAILED -- APPLICATION RECEIVED IN OFFICE OF
>> PUBLICATIONS.
>> Thank you have a great day. Agent 31
>>
>> I don't know what it means.
>>
>> Weng
>
> I'm confused: the Google page you linked to has a "Download PDF" button
> which gets you the full 19 page patient. There's also a link for "View
> patient at USPTO" which takes you directly to the page for patient
> number 7,394,287 at the USPTO site. So what is it that you're looking for?
>
> Chris
Ignore that post - I see now. The patient application that you're
looking for is referenced in the one you pointed to. (Note to self -
engage brain before pushing send.)
Reply by Chris Abele●June 16, 20092009-06-16
Weng Tianxiang wrote:
> On Jun 16, 8:51 am, rickman <gnu...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Jun 16, 9:34 am, Weng Tianxiang <wtx...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>> On Jun 15, 9:41 pm, rickman <gnu...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> On Jun 15, 1:39 pm, Weng Tianxiang <wtx...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>> On Jun 15, 9:23 am, OutputLogic <evgen...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>> You can try to go to USPTO database and lookup the history of this
>>>>>> patent application.
>>>>>> It's not under the patent search, but under "http://www.uspto.gov" ->
>>>>>> "Patents" -> "view in PAIR" -> "public PAIR".
>>>>>> This database contains a complete history of the patent, including the
>>>>>> correspondence with patent examiners, etc.
>>>>>> Also, can you post the patent application number.
>>>>>> - outputlogic
>>>>>> http://outputlogic.com
>>>>> Hi OutputLogic,
>>>>> Thank you for your information.
>>>>> I had searched the website before I posed this message and got the
>>>>> error information:
>>>>> "Sorry, the entered Application Number "10/718968" is not available.
>>>>> The number may have been incorrectly typed, or assigned to an
>>>>> application
>>>>> that is not yet available for public inspection."
>>>>> I don't know why I got the error message.
>>>>> 10/718968 is available from reference literature in the invention:
>>>>> "Programmable Logic Device Having Complex Logic Blocks with Improved
>>>>> Logic Cell Functionality", patent number 7,394,287, by Alera from
>>>>> following website:http://www.google.com/patents/about?id=5yyrAAAAEBAJ&dq=patent:7394287...
>>>>> Weng
>>>> 7,394,287 is the patent number. It works for me at the USPTO. What
>>>> is the number you are searching for?
>>>> Rick- Hide quoted text -
>>>> - Show quoted text -
>>> Hi Rick,
>>> I have tried to find the text and its drawings of patent application
>>> "Logic Cell
>>> Supporting Addition of Three Binary Words" filed on Nov. 21, 2003, US
>>> application number 10/718968, but it must pay to get its context from
>>> USPTO, even though it was in public domain about 6 years ago.
>>> Can you help get the context and drawings from USPTO for me?
>>> Weng
>> Where did you get the above info? That does not appear to be a valid
>> document number. It needs to have 11 digits where the first four
>> appear to be the year.
>> I searched on "Three Binary Words" in the title and came up with
>> nothing.
>>
>> I did search on this for patents and found this one which I think is
>> interesting... maybe this is why the adder is just a plus sign with a
>> circle... 4,783,757. Note that the owner is Intel, not Altera.
>>
>> Rick
>>
>> Rick- Hide quoted text -
>>
>> - Show quoted text -
>
> Hi Rick,
> I got the number from the patent "Programmable Logic Device Having
> Complex Logic Blocks with Improved Logic Cell Functionality"
> in its page 1 under "Other publications".
> http://www.google.com/patents/about?id=5yyrAAAAEBAJ&dq=patent:7394287&as_drrb_ap=q&as_minm_ap=0&as_miny_ap=&as_maxm_ap=0&as_maxy_ap=&as_drrb_is=q&as_minm_is=0&as_miny_is=&as_maxm_is=0&as_maxy_is=
>
> Here is an email I sent to USPTO for confirmation and its response:
> Hi,
> I want to research patent application"Logic Cell Supporting Addition
> of Three Binary Words." U.S. Application Number 10/718,968, filed
> November 21, 2003.
>
> It should have been published long ago and in public domain.
>
> Please tell how to find the patent application.
>
> Thank you.
>
> Weng
>
> Hello
>
> The status of the application is
> 93 /NOTICE OF ALLOWANCE MAILED -- APPLICATION RECEIVED IN OFFICE OF
> PUBLICATIONS.
> Thank you have a great day. Agent 31
>
> I don't know what it means.
>
> Weng
I'm confused: the Google page you linked to has a "Download PDF" button
which gets you the full 19 page patient. There's also a link for "View
patient at USPTO" which takes you directly to the page for patient
number 7,394,287 at the USPTO site. So what is it that you're looking for?
Chris
Reply by Weng Tianxiang●June 16, 20092009-06-16
On Jun 16, 8:51=A0am, rickman <gnu...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Jun 16, 9:34=A0am, Weng Tianxiang <wtx...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Jun 15, 9:41=A0pm, rickman <gnu...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > On Jun 15, 1:39=A0pm, Weng Tianxiang <wtx...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > > On Jun 15, 9:23=A0am, OutputLogic <evgen...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > > > You can try to go to USPTO database and lookup the history of thi=
s
> > > > > patent application.
> > > > > It's not under the patent search, but under "http://www.uspto.gov=
" ->
> > > > > "Patents" -> "view in PAIR" -> "public PAIR".
> > > > > This database contains a complete history of the patent, includin=
g the
> > > > > correspondence with patent examiners, etc.
> > > > > Also, can you post the patent application number.
>
> > > > > - outputlogic
>
> > > > >http://outputlogic.com
>
> > > > Hi OutputLogic,
> > > > Thank you for your information.
>
> > > > I had searched the website before I posed this message and got the
> > > > error information:
> > > > "Sorry, the entered Application Number "10/718968" is not available=
.
> > > > The number may have been incorrectly typed, or assigned to an
> > > > application
> > > > that is not yet available for public inspection."
>
> > > > I don't know why I got the error message.
>
> > > > 10/718968 is available from reference literature in the invention:
> > > > "Programmable Logic Device Having Complex Logic Blocks with Improve=
>
> > > > Weng
>
> > > 7,394,287 is the patent number. =A0It works for me at the USPTO. =A0W=
hat
> > > is the number you are searching for?
>
> > > Rick- Hide quoted text -
>
> > > - Show quoted text -
>
> > Hi Rick,
> > I have tried to find the text and its drawings of patent application
> > "Logic Cell
> > Supporting Addition of Three Binary Words" filed on Nov. 21, 2003, US
> > application number 10/718968, but it must pay to get its context from
> > USPTO, even though it was in public domain about 6 years ago.
>
> > Can you help get the context and drawings from USPTO for me?
>
> > Weng
>
> Where did you get the above info? =A0That does not appear to be a valid
> document number. =A0It needs to have 11 digits where the first four
> appear to be the year.
> I searched on "Three Binary Words" in the title and came up with
> nothing.
>
> I did search on this for patents and found this one which I think is
> interesting... maybe this is why the adder is just a plus sign with a
> circle... 4,783,757. =A0Note that the owner is Intel, not Altera.
>
> Rick
>
> Rick- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -
Hi Rick,
I got the number from the patent "Programmable Logic Device Having
Complex Logic Blocks with Improved Logic Cell Functionality"
in its page 1 under "Other publications".
http://www.google.com/patents/about?id=3D5yyrAAAAEBAJ&dq=3Dpatent:7394287&a=
s_drrb_ap=3Dq&as_minm_ap=3D0&as_miny_ap=3D&as_maxm_ap=3D0&as_maxy_ap=3D&as_=
drrb_is=3Dq&as_minm_is=3D0&as_miny_is=3D&as_maxm_is=3D0&as_maxy_is=3D
Here is an email I sent to USPTO for confirmation and its response:
Hi,
I want to research patent application"Logic Cell Supporting Addition
of Three Binary Words." U.S. Application Number 10/718,968, filed
November 21, 2003.
It should have been published long ago and in public domain.
Please tell how to find the patent application.
Thank you.
Weng
Hello
The status of the application is
93 /NOTICE OF ALLOWANCE MAILED -- APPLICATION RECEIVED IN OFFICE OF
PUBLICATIONS.
Thank you have a great day. Agent 31
I don't know what it means.
Weng
Reply by rickman●June 16, 20092009-06-16
On Jun 16, 9:34=A0am, Weng Tianxiang <wtx...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Jun 15, 9:41=A0pm, rickman <gnu...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> > On Jun 15, 1:39=A0pm, Weng Tianxiang <wtx...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > On Jun 15, 9:23=A0am, OutputLogic <evgen...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > > You can try to go to USPTO database and lookup the history of this
> > > > patent application.
> > > > It's not under the patent search, but under "http://www.uspto.gov" =
->
> > > > "Patents" -> "view in PAIR" -> "public PAIR".
> > > > This database contains a complete history of the patent, including =
the
> > > > correspondence with patent examiners, etc.
> > > > Also, can you post the patent application number.
>
> > > > - outputlogic
>
> > > >http://outputlogic.com
>
> > > Hi OutputLogic,
> > > Thank you for your information.
>
> > > I had searched the website before I posed this message and got the
> > > error information:
> > > "Sorry, the entered Application Number "10/718968" is not available.
> > > The number may have been incorrectly typed, or assigned to an
> > > application
> > > that is not yet available for public inspection."
>
> > > I don't know why I got the error message.
>
> > > 10/718968 is available from reference literature in the invention:
> > > "Programmable Logic Device Having Complex Logic Blocks with Improved
> > > Logic Cell Functionality", patent number 7,394,287, by Alera from
> > > following website:http://www.google.com/patents/about?id=3D5yyrAAAAEB=
AJ&dq=3Dpatent:7394287...
>
> > > Weng
>
> > 7,394,287 is the patent number. =A0It works for me at the USPTO. =A0Wha=
t
> > is the number you are searching for?
>
> > Rick- Hide quoted text -
>
> > - Show quoted text -
>
> Hi Rick,
> I have tried to find the text and its drawings of patent application
> "Logic Cell
> Supporting Addition of Three Binary Words" filed on Nov. 21, 2003, US
> application number 10/718968, but it must pay to get its context from
> USPTO, even though it was in public domain about 6 years ago.
>
> Can you help get the context and drawings from USPTO for me?
>
> Weng
Where did you get the above info? That does not appear to be a valid
document number. It needs to have 11 digits where the first four
appear to be the year.
I searched on "Three Binary Words" in the title and came up with
nothing.
I did search on this for patents and found this one which I think is
interesting... maybe this is why the adder is just a plus sign with a
circle... 4,783,757. Note that the owner is Intel, not Altera.
Rick
Rick
Reply by Weng Tianxiang●June 16, 20092009-06-16
On Jun 15, 9:41=A0pm, rickman <gnu...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Jun 15, 1:39=A0pm, Weng Tianxiang <wtx...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Jun 15, 9:23=A0am, OutputLogic <evgen...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > You can try to go to USPTO database and lookup the history of this
> > > patent application.
> > > It's not under the patent search, but under "http://www.uspto.gov" ->
> > > "Patents" -> "view in PAIR" -> "public PAIR".
> > > This database contains a complete history of the patent, including th=
e
> > > correspondence with patent examiners, etc.
> > > Also, can you post the patent application number.
>
> > > - outputlogic
>
> > >http://outputlogic.com
>
> > Hi OutputLogic,
> > Thank you for your information.
>
> > I had searched the website before I posed this message and got the
> > error information:
> > "Sorry, the entered Application Number "10/718968" is not available.
> > The number may have been incorrectly typed, or assigned to an
> > application
> > that is not yet available for public inspection."
>
> > I don't know why I got the error message.
>
> > 10/718968 is available from reference literature in the invention:
> > "Programmable Logic Device Having Complex Logic Blocks with Improved
> > Logic Cell Functionality", patent number 7,394,287, by Alera from
> > following website:http://www.google.com/patents/about?id=3D5yyrAAAAEBAJ=
&dq=3Dpatent:7394287...
>
> > Weng
>
> 7,394,287 is the patent number. =A0It works for me at the USPTO. =A0What
> is the number you are searching for?
>
> Rick- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -
Hi Rick,
I have tried to find the text and its drawings of patent application
"Logic Cell
Supporting Addition of Three Binary Words" filed on Nov. 21, 2003, US
application number 10/718968, but it must pay to get its context from
USPTO, even though it was in public domain about 6 years ago.
Can you help get the context and drawings from USPTO for me?
Weng
Reply by Weng Tianxiang●June 16, 20092009-06-16
On Jun 15, 9:25=A0pm, rickman <gnu...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Jun 15, 12:22=A0pm, Weng Tianxiang <wtx...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Jun 15, 8:39=A0am, rickman <gnu...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > On Jun 15, 10:13 am, Weng Tianxiang <wtx...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > > On Jun 15, 4:36 am, rickman <gnu...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > > > On Jun 14, 1:21 pm, Weng Tianxiang <wtx...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > > > > Hi,
> > > > > > I recently read Altera Stratix II, III and IV device handbook a=
nd
> > > > > > found its 3-bit addition circuit is really a genius invention. =
But I
> > > > > > was surprised to find that Altera patent application "Logic Cel=
l
> > > > > > Supporting Addition of Three Binary Words" filed on Nov. 21, 20=
03 has
> > > > > > not been approved to be a patent so far today, even though many=
Altera
> > > > > > later patent applications based on the invention have been appr=
oved
> > > > > > for U.S. patents.
>
> > > > > > Is anyone knowledgable about the patent application willing to
> > > > > > transfer the patent application context to me and disclose why =
it
> > > > > > hasn't been approved as a U.S. patent.
>
> > > > > > My guess is it may never be approved by U.S. Patent Office to b=
e a
> > > > > > patent, the reason is not its novelty violation, but its contex=
t
> > > > > > didn't disclose enough information about the 3-bit addition cir=
cuit, a
> > > > > > requirement for any patent application to be approved to be a U=
.S.
> > > > > > patent. At least those skilled in the art cannot get the idea w=
hat is
> > > > > > done within its circuit having an encircled '+' with 3 inputs a=
> > > > > > Programmable Logic Device" filed on Oct. 23, 2003 has the same =
fate.
>
> > > > > > Thank you.
>
> > > > > > Weng
>
> > > > > I don't know why Altera wouldn't disclose info on the structure b=
eing
> > > > > used in a device. =A0It is relatively inexpensive to reverse engi=
neer a
> > > > > chip, so if it is not disclosed in a patent, it is not protected =
and
> > > > > is vulnerable to being copied.
>
> > > > > What exactly *does* the patent claim? =A0Maybe the design inside =
the
> > > > > circled + is not really novel and only the design around the circ=
le is
> > > > > novel enough to be patented?
>
> > > > > In general, I think a three in put adder is *very useful*. =A0I'v=
e never
> > > > > seen such a circuit, I guess the carry chain has multiple bits, e=
h?
>
> > > > > Rick- Hide quoted text -
>
> > > > > - Show quoted text -
>
> > > > Hi Rick,
> > > > Here is a link to Stratix IV Device Handbook Volumn 1 and page 43
> > > > shows the invention circuit:http://www.altera.com/literature/hb/str=
atix-iv/stx4_5v1.pdf
>
> > > > Why is it very useful? In the Stratix IV Device Handbook Volumn 1, =
it
> > > > describes two applications: multiplication and correlation function=
.
>
> > > > Any other applications? With multiplier hardware structure speciall=
y
> > > > introduced in FPGA, is multiplication circuit still used for
> > > > multiplication?
>
> > > Although they show the interconnections being used, they don't show
> > > the logic implemented in the LUTs. =A0The carry from one bit to the n=
ext
> > > is done with two signals each of which has the same weight. =A0As far=
as
> > > I can tell, this is just a pair of cascaded adders, the first done in
> > > the LUTs and the second done in dedicated hardware. =A0The only novel=
ty
> > > is that instead of adding two inputs with one adder chain (the LUTs)
> > > and then adding the result to the third input with the dedicated
> > > hardware chain, they add all three input bits using the LUTs and feed
> > > both carry bits into the dedicated hardware chain which means the
> > > carry chain always uses the fast, dedicated hardware.
>
> > > Does that sound like a patent worthy invention to you? =A0I don't rea=
lly
> > > know what is and what is not worthy of a patent. =A0But other patents
> > > "based" on this patent will not be affected by the validity of this
> > > patent. =A0Even if this patent is upheld, ***I*** could patent some
> > > additional feature that uses this design as a starting point. =A0I ju=
st
> > > can't build it without permission from the patent holder of the
> > > original design. =A0Still, this means he/she couldn't use my idea
> > > without my permission either.
>
> > > Rick- Hide quoted text -
>
> > > - Show quoted text -
>
> > Hi Rick,
> > There are two novel points there:
> > 1. It transfers 3 adders into 2 adders which was described very clear:
> > nobody before had invented that point.
>
> No, it is not 3 adders using 2 adders, it is always just 2 adders.
> The only difference is that there is only one cascaded chain. =A0There
> are two carries between each bit of the adder, sort of like a
> "Propagate/Generate" style of carry, only one results in a chained
> delay calculation. =A0But I don't see any real advantage to that. =A0I
> think the real advantage of this circuit is that it takes advantage of
> the large, 6 input LUT by breaking it into dual 4 input LUTs... but
> wait, that is still wasting half the 6 input LUTs. =A0So it is really
> just an optimization of their particular architecture.
>
> The only possible novelty here is that they are doing this in an
> FPGA.
>
> > 2. Circuit is marked by circled '+' with 3 inputs and 2 outputs whose
> > internal structure wasn't shown.
>
> Yep, that is because that part is not very patentable, in my opinion.
> You don't put anything in a patent that is not patentable. =A0Anything
> you don't explain in a patent is not part of it.
>
> > 3. I am sure there may be more than 20 claims in the application as
> > Altera patent claim trandition goes.
>
> Sure, any patent attorney worth his salt is going to put as many
> claims in as possible. =A0If I understand correctly any claim can stand
> alone even if the others are struck down.
>
> Rick- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -
Hi Rick,
"No, it is not 3 adders using 2 adders, it is always just 2 adders.
The only difference is that there is only one cascaded chain. There
are two carries between each bit of the adder, sort of like a
"Propagate/Generate" style of carry, only one results in a chained
delay calculation. But I don't see any real advantage to that. I
think the real advantage of this circuit is that it takes advantage
of
the large, 6 input LUT by breaking it into dual 4 input LUTs... but
wait, that is still wasting half the 6 input LUTs. So it is really
just an optimization of their particular architecture.
The only possible novelty here is that they are doing this in an
FPGA. "
Thank you for your comments.
You are right. I realized it after I posed the message and re-read
other papers about 3:2 compressor and I didn't correct it myself.
Reply by rickman●June 16, 20092009-06-16
On Jun 15, 1:39=A0pm, Weng Tianxiang <wtx...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Jun 15, 9:23=A0am, OutputLogic <evgen...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > You can try to go to USPTO database and lookup the history of this
> > patent application.
> > It's not under the patent search, but under "http://www.uspto.gov" ->
> > "Patents" -> "view in PAIR" -> "public PAIR".
> > This database contains a complete history of the patent, including the
> > correspondence with patent examiners, etc.
> > Also, can you post the patent application number.
>
> > - outputlogic
>
> >http://outputlogic.com
>
> Hi OutputLogic,
> Thank you for your information.
>
> I had searched the website before I posed this message and got the
> error information:
> "Sorry, the entered Application Number "10/718968" is not available.
> The number may have been incorrectly typed, or assigned to an
> application
> that is not yet available for public inspection."
>
> I don't know why I got the error message.
>
> 10/718968 is available from reference literature in the invention:
> "Programmable Logic Device Having Complex Logic Blocks with Improved
> Logic Cell Functionality", patent number 7,394,287, by Alera from
> following website:http://www.google.com/patents/about?id=3D5yyrAAAAEBAJ&d=
q=3Dpatent:7394287...
>
> Weng
7,394,287 is the patent number. It works for me at the USPTO. What
is the number you are searching for?
Rick
Reply by rickman●June 16, 20092009-06-16
On Jun 15, 8:06=A0pm, Muzaffer Kal <k...@dspia.com> wrote:
> On Mon, 15 Jun 2009 16:44:19 -0700 (PDT), Weng Tianxiang
>
> <wtx...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >The circuit circled in '+' with 3 inputs and 2 outputs is novelty in
> >my opinion, but they didn't disclose it.
>
> It would be interesting to see if it's anything other than a 3:2
> compressor.
Someone is missing something. What is the three input, two output
circuit? Each bit of the adder has five inputs and three outputs.
The three addend inputs can add up to 3 and with the two carry inputs
the total can be up to five requiring two carrie outputs of weight 2
and the sum output of weight 1. Of course, I am looking at the data
sheet and I guess you are looking at the patent.
Rick
Reply by rickman●June 16, 20092009-06-16
On Jun 15, 12:22=A0pm, Weng Tianxiang <wtx...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Jun 15, 8:39=A0am, rickman <gnu...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> > On Jun 15, 10:13 am, Weng Tianxiang <wtx...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > On Jun 15, 4:36 am, rickman <gnu...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > > On Jun 14, 1:21 pm, Weng Tianxiang <wtx...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > > > Hi,
> > > > > I recently read Altera Stratix II, III and IV device handbook and
> > > > > found its 3-bit addition circuit is really a genius invention. Bu=
t I
> > > > > was surprised to find that Altera patent application "Logic Cell
> > > > > Supporting Addition of Three Binary Words" filed on Nov. 21, 2003=
has
> > > > > not been approved to be a patent so far today, even though many A=
ltera
> > > > > later patent applications based on the invention have been approv=
ed
> > > > > for U.S. patents.
>
> > > > > Is anyone knowledgable about the patent application willing to
> > > > > transfer the patent application context to me and disclose why it
> > > > > hasn't been approved as a U.S. patent.
>
> > > > > My guess is it may never be approved by U.S. Patent Office to be =
a
> > > > > patent, the reason is not its novelty violation, but its context
> > > > > didn't disclose enough information about the 3-bit addition circu=
it, a
> > > > > requirement for any patent application to be approved to be a U.S=
.
> > > > > patent. At least those skilled in the art cannot get the idea wha=
t is
> > > > > done within its circuit having an encircled '+' with 3 inputs and=
2
> > > > > outputs.
>
> > > > > Altera another sister patent application "Arithmetic Structure is=
for
> > > > > Programmable Logic Device" filed on Oct. 23, 2003 has the same fa=
te.
>
> > > > > Thank you.
>
> > > > > Weng
>
> > > > I don't know why Altera wouldn't disclose info on the structure bei=
ng
> > > > used in a device. =A0It is relatively inexpensive to reverse engine=
er a
> > > > chip, so if it is not disclosed in a patent, it is not protected an=
d
> > > > is vulnerable to being copied.
>
> > > > What exactly *does* the patent claim? =A0Maybe the design inside th=
e
> > > > circled + is not really novel and only the design around the circle=
is
> > > > novel enough to be patented?
>
> > > > In general, I think a three in put adder is *very useful*. =A0I've =
never
> > > > seen such a circuit, I guess the carry chain has multiple bits, eh?
>
> > > > Rick- Hide quoted text -
>
> > > > - Show quoted text -
>
> > > Hi Rick,
> > > Here is a link to Stratix IV Device Handbook Volumn 1 and page 43
> > > shows the invention circuit:http://www.altera.com/literature/hb/strat=
ix-iv/stx4_5v1.pdf
>
> > > Why is it very useful? In the Stratix IV Device Handbook Volumn 1, it
> > > describes two applications: multiplication and correlation function.
>
> > > Any other applications? With multiplier hardware structure specially
> > > introduced in FPGA, is multiplication circuit still used for
> > > multiplication?
>
> > Although they show the interconnections being used, they don't show
> > the logic implemented in the LUTs. =A0The carry from one bit to the nex=
t
> > is done with two signals each of which has the same weight. =A0As far a=
s
> > I can tell, this is just a pair of cascaded adders, the first done in
> > the LUTs and the second done in dedicated hardware. =A0The only novelty
> > is that instead of adding two inputs with one adder chain (the LUTs)
> > and then adding the result to the third input with the dedicated
> > hardware chain, they add all three input bits using the LUTs and feed
> > both carry bits into the dedicated hardware chain which means the
> > carry chain always uses the fast, dedicated hardware.
>
> > Does that sound like a patent worthy invention to you? =A0I don't reall=
y
> > know what is and what is not worthy of a patent. =A0But other patents
> > "based" on this patent will not be affected by the validity of this
> > patent. =A0Even if this patent is upheld, ***I*** could patent some
> > additional feature that uses this design as a starting point. =A0I just
> > can't build it without permission from the patent holder of the
> > original design. =A0Still, this means he/she couldn't use my idea
> > without my permission either.
>
> > Rick- Hide quoted text -
>
> > - Show quoted text -
>
> Hi Rick,
> There are two novel points there:
> 1. It transfers 3 adders into 2 adders which was described very clear:
> nobody before had invented that point.
No, it is not 3 adders using 2 adders, it is always just 2 adders.
The only difference is that there is only one cascaded chain. There
are two carries between each bit of the adder, sort of like a
"Propagate/Generate" style of carry, only one results in a chained
delay calculation. But I don't see any real advantage to that. I
think the real advantage of this circuit is that it takes advantage of
the large, 6 input LUT by breaking it into dual 4 input LUTs... but
wait, that is still wasting half the 6 input LUTs. So it is really
just an optimization of their particular architecture.
The only possible novelty here is that they are doing this in an
FPGA.
> 2. Circuit is marked by circled '+' with 3 inputs and 2 outputs whose
> internal structure wasn't shown.
Yep, that is because that part is not very patentable, in my opinion.
You don't put anything in a patent that is not patentable. Anything
you don't explain in a patent is not part of it.
> 3. I am sure there may be more than 20 claims in the application as
> Altera patent claim trandition goes.
Sure, any patent attorney worth his salt is going to put as many
claims in as possible. If I understand correctly any claim can stand
alone even if the others are struck down.
Rick