Appeal 2007-0145
Application 10/183,797
workspace for the user after a period of inactivity" (Final Rejection 3-4).
The Examiner concludes that it would have been obvious to one of ordinary
skill in the art "to modify the system of Hale to incorporate the individual
session or window control as taught by Maddalozzo, in order to obtain a
system that is able to automatically detect for a given window when the
inactivity period has expired" (Final Rejection 4).
Appellants argue that Hale relates to a computer system that
automatically disables peripheral device access to the computer system after
the peripheral input devices remain inactive for a predetermined period
(Br. 9). It is argued that there is no disclosure in Hale of a windows-based
operating system and Hale teaches away from a windows-based operating
system because it addresses problems with DOS-based TSR (terminate and
stay resident) programs (Br. 10). It is argued that although Hale discloses
blanking the display or displaying a unique pattern on the screen, Hale does
not teach that a protected window may be inactivated because Hale does not
teach a window and because the keyboard controller in Hale operates
independently of the host computer (Br. 10). Appellants find that
Maddalozzo tracks timeouts of accesses to secured databases or other
variable parameters related to the date in the windows and changes the color
of the frames or borders of the windows to provide a visual warning or alarm
that a particular window will require renewal (Br. 11). It is argued that
Maddalozzo also fails to inactivate a protected window, because the only
7
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: September 9, 2013