Appeal No. 96-3294
Application 08/055,422
Kitajima et al. (Kitajima) 2,184,267 June 17, 1987
(United Kingdom patent application)
Claims 1-10 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being
unpatentable over Mattson and Kitajima.
We refer to the First Office Action (Paper No. 2), the
Final Rejection (Paper No. 5), and the Examiner's Answer
(Paper No. 11) (pages referred to as "EA__") for a statement
of the Examiner's position and to the Brief (Paper No. 9)
(pages referred to as "Br__") for a statement of Appellants'
arguments thereagainst.
OPINION
Appellants identify the following grouping of claims
(Br6): (1) claims 1-6 and 9; (2) claim 7; (3) claim 8; and
(4) claim 10. Normally, claims in group (1) would be
considered to stand or fall together with the broadest claim
in the group. The broadest claim in group (1) is considered
to be claim 9, since claim 9 recites classifying filesets
based on "access operation statistics" rather than the more
specific "read/write ratio" in claim 1. However, since
appellants mostly confine their arguments to claim 1, claims 1
and 9 are considered separately.
- 3 -
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007