Appeal No. 2006-1757
Application No. 10/116,522
battery backed-up RAM) [answer, page 8].
We will sustain the examiner's anticipation rejection. At
the outset, we note that steps 204, 206, and 208 in Fig. 2 of
Cepulis fully meet the limitation of claim 1 calling for
"scanning information regarding the plurality of devices in the
scanning order to identify the first device." After initially
clearing the logical resource map, Cepulis sequentially obtains
ID codes of failed devices from the failed device log. The
system then tags as unavailable those logical resources that
correspond to the failed physical devices [Cepulis, Fig. 2, step
212]. Based on this tagging process, only available logical
devices are reported to the computer's operating system [Cepulis,
Fig. 2, step 216].
In our view, Cepulis' method of reporting only those logical
devices that are available (i.e., logical resources that are not
tagged as unavailable) reasonably constitutes "skipping over each
device that is identified in a data structure" as claimed.
Specifically, tagging unavailable resources corresponding to
failed physical devices inherently identifies such failed devices
in a data structure. Moreover, reporting only available devices
to the operating system inherently "skips over" (i.e., omits) the
6
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007