Appeal No. 97-1355
Application 08/072,826
invention. Accordingly, we do not sustain the rejection of
claims 1, 3, 6-8, 10, 13 and 14.
Initially, however, we express our disagreement with the
appellant's view that Petaccia does not disclose automatically
deleting files which have been found to match predefined user
designated criteria for deletion because subsequent to the
successful search for files the actual deletion requires another
step from the user, i.e., execution of a "batch" delete command.
The examiner correctly pointed out that even the appellant's own
preferred embodiment provides for the user's reviewing a list of
found items based on the predetermined criteria and making a
final decision to delete (answer at 6). Thus, applying the rule
of broadest reasonable interpretation consistent with the
specification, we conclude that the automatically deleting
feature does not exclude a last minute user verification of all
the files to be deleted before the delete operation is executed.
The examiner also correctly determined that "Petaccia did
not describe the selection of a 'scrubber' container as that term
can fairly be interpreted from appellant's disclosure" (answer
at 5). Indeed, we find that Petaccia does not disclose a
"scrubber" container. Since there is no scrubber container in
Petaccia, no scrubber container can be selected.
-3-
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007