Ex Parte HERBST et al - Page 2



         Appeal No. 2003-1877                                                       
         Application No. 09/375,071                                                 

         Claim 1 is illustrative of the claimed invention, and it reads as          
         follows:                                                                   
              1.   A method for storing data in a file comprising the               
         steps of:                                                                  
              associating a defined number of storage regions with the              
         file including a first region and an end of file region;                   
              storing data in the associated storage regions to provide an          
         unused size of the file corresponding to a portion of the                  
         associated storage regions not containing data; and then                   
              receiving additional data;                                            
              redesignating the first region as a new end of file region;           
         and                                                                        
              storing at least a portion of the additional data in the new          
         end of file region.                                                        
              The prior art references of record relied upon by the                 
         examiner in rejecting the appealed claims are:                             
         Sherman                       5,432,928           Jul. 11, 1995            
         Blowers et al. (Blowers)      6,298,474           Oct. 02, 2001            
                                                 (filed Apr. 30, 1999)              
              Claims 1 and 2 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 102(b) as             
         being anticipated by Sherman.                                              
              Claims 3 through 26 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as           
         being unpatentable over Sherman in view of Blowers.                        
              Reference is made to the Examiner's Answer (Paper No. 17,             
         mailed April 21, 2003) for the examiner's complete reasoning in            
         support of the rejections, and to appellants' Brief (Paper                 
                                         2                                          




Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  Next 

Last modified: November 3, 2007