Appeal No. 96-3294
Application 08/055,422
devices, Kitajima fails to explain how read/write ratios are
used and is not relevant to the claimed invention (Br10).
We agree with Appellants that the subject matter of
claim 1 is not suggested by the combination of Mattson and
Kitajima. Kitajima discloses a method for optimum allocation
of files to storage devices in which the desired hit ratio,
number of writes, and read/write ratio are kept within
suitable ranges (abstract). Kitajima does not clearly explain
how read/write ratios are used. Kitajima does not suggest the
use of read/write ratios to implement different buffer
management policies or assigning files based on their
read/write ratio. Since Kitajima is directed to allocation of
files to storage devices rather than improving the hit ratio
in buffers in a client-server environment, it appears that the
only way the Examiner could have come to use the read/write
ratio teachings of Kitajima was by impermissible hindsight
using Appellants' disclosure as a guide. Appellants indicate
that they discovered that different read/write ratios in a
client-server environment favor different buffer management
policies (specification, page 5). There is no teaching of
this concept in Mattson or Kitajima. The general teaching in
- 5 -
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007