Appeal No. 2003-0227
Application No. 09/428,871
wants to access them repeatedly, the long delays associated with
accessing tape storage are only incurred once; subsequent
requests for the same images can be provided quickly since the
third data storage unit would obviously be some type of storage
unit with a shorter access time than tape” (answer, page 7). The
examiner, however, does not explain, and it is not apparent, how
this conclusion follows from the relied-upon reference
disclosures rather than coming from the appellants’ disclosure.
The examiner argues that a separate partition of Garfinkle’s
image server (col. 5, lines 49-52) anticipates the appellants’
third data storage unit (answer, page 8). This argument is not
well taken because the examiner does not explain how this
separate partition caches digital images from a second storage
unit which archives digital images from a first storage unit.
The examiner argues that “Garfinkle’s special directory
reserved for caching thumbnail images anticipates the third data
storage unit (column 6, lines 64-66). Even though this directory
is on the image server, it is a separate area from where the full
-7-
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007