Appeal No. 2002-0384
Application No. 09/111,849
logs to be kept (col.4, lines 16-23)." The examiner contends
that it would have been obvious to modify Bell to include removal
of the record at the end of the time period "in the same
conventional manner, as suggested by Freud [sic, Freund]." The
examiner provides as motivation, "to keep track of user login
activities to thereby restrict access to the system only to
authorized users, which would further prevent sophisticated brute
force attacks on the password, as suggested by Freud [sic,
Freund] (col.3, lines 65-66; col.4, lines 7-28)."
Freund (column 4, lines 16-28) discloses that rules can be
made for a computer "to determine what events should be logged
(including how long are logs to be kept)." Although Freund
suggests that events may be removed at the end of some period of
time, we find no teaching in Freund as to why one would want to
remove an event record in response to the end of the time period
for detecting such events. It is unclear to us how removing an
event record would "keep track of user login activities to
thereby restrict access to the system only to authorized users,"
as asserted by the examiner. As the references fail to teach the
limitation of claim 4 and of the claims grouped therewith, we
cannot sustain the obviousness rejection of claims 4, 5, 11, 12,
16, and 17.
7
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007