Appeal 2007-1352
Application 10/406,127
Issue 1: Anticipation of claim 16.
Appellants argue that Duprey does not disclose a first cache adapter
that has both a cache memory and a memory for storing a list containing at
least one record of write data. (Br. 16; Reply Br. 6.) We do not agree.
Initially, we note that the claim limitation "for storing a list containing
at least one record of write data received from the at least one data
processor" is merely an intended use of the recited "memory" of the first
cache adaptor. Therefore, this limitation is not entitled to patentable weight.
As will be explained, however, even if this limitation is given patentable
weight it is met by Duprey.
As the Examiner correctly found, Duprey teaches a storage processor
for the master storage unit that includes a write cache and functions as a
cache adaptor to temporarily store data from the host that is destined for the
disk array. (Answer 3, 16; FF 3.) The storage processor corresponds to the
first cache adaptor and the write cache corresponds to the first cache
memory. Also, the Examiner correctly found that Duprey teaches a write
intent log that identifies portions of the slave images that may be
unsynchronized and also teaches that the master storage unit stores a write
entry in the write intent log when it receives a write request from the host.
(Answer 5; FF 2-3.) We agree with the Examiner that the limitation of the
first cache adaptor "further comprising memory" recited by claim 16 does
not require the memory to be physically separate from the first cache
memory and we agree that that such an interpretation is consistent with the
Specification. (Answer 17; Specification 8:4-8.)
12
Page: Previous 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 Next
Last modified: September 9, 2013