Appeal No. 1998-3329 Page 7
Application No. 08/261,518
specifies in pertinent part the following limitations: “a
local machine name which is a symbolic link for specifying a
computer on which execution is to be performed; ... the first
computer is configured to, if the process is to be locally
executed on itself, link the local machine name to itself and
execute the process; and the first computer is further
configured to, if the process is to be remotely executed on
the second computer, transfer the first context from itself to
the second computer; the second computer being configured to
add the second context to the first context, link the local
machine name to itself, and execute the process.”
Accordingly, claims 44 and 52 require inter alia providing a
local machine name, which is a symbolic link for specifying a
computer on which execution is to be performed, and linking
the local machine name to such a computer.
Having determined what subject matter is being claimed,
the next inquiry is whether the subject matter is obvious.
“In rejecting claims under 35 U.S.C. Section 103, the examiner
bears the initial burden of presenting a prima facie case of
obviousness.” In re Rijckaert, 9 F.3d 1531, 1532, 28 USPQ2d
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007