Appeal No. 2006-1056
Application No. 10/606,514
Moreover, as explained by the examiner, the prediction of a
temperature (i.e., a temperature estimate) may be “calculated” by
summing the power dissipated by I/O devices. While power
dissipation, per se, is not equivalent to temperature, even
appellants admit (principal brief-page 4) that the temperature of
Nizar’s device “has some relationship to the sum of the power
dissipation.” Although appellants argue that power dissipation
is not “identical” (principal brief-page 4) to device
temperature, since the temperature is proportional to, or rather
has a predetermined relationship to, the power dissipation, the
calculation of power dissipation, which Nizar clearly suggests,
is also a determination, or “calculation” of a temperature
estimate, as claimed.
Appellants argue that Nizar fails to describe controlling
access to the device using the “predicted temperature.” However,
since throttling is applied, based on the calculation of power
dissipation, and power dissipation is directly related to
temperature of the device, and throttling controls the access to
the device, e.g., by reducing activity, Nizar does, indeed,
control access to the device using the “predicted temperature.”
9
Page: Previous 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007