Appeal No. 2004-2175
Application 09/086,627
assigning a priority to each of the at least two processes,
the second process being assigned a lower priority than the first
process;
for the first process running on at least one of the two
nodes, setting a minimum resource allocation for the first
process on the at least two nodes independent of the computer
resources needed by other processes running on the computer
network; and
redistributing computer resources on the network so that the
first process is provided the minimum resource allocation for the
first process is guaranteed should insufficient network resources
by available.
The following references are relied on by the examiner:
Sumimoto 5,522,070 May 28, 1996
Culbert 5,838,968 Nov. 17, 1998
(filing date Mar. 1, 1996)
Hauser et al. (Hauser) 5,889,956 Mar. 30, 1999
(filing date July 18, 1996)
All claims on appeal stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103.
As evidence of obviousness as to claims 1-5 and 9-16, the
examiner relies upon Culbert in view of Sumimoto. As to claim 7,
the examiner adds Hauser to the initial combination of
references.
2
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007