Appeal No. 1996-3076
Application 08/118,773
Therefore, we find that Dieter does not anticipate claim 23.
The rejection of claim 23 is reversed.
Claim 26
Claim 26 is similar to claim 10 except that it omits
the limitation about "means for communicating
bidirectionally with the operating system (OS) and the
service program" and adds a "writing means." We have
addressed the limitations of claim 26 in the discussion of
claim 10 except for the "writing means."
Appellant argues that "the Examiner has not identified
any identical teaching in Dieter of the writing means of
Claim 26, which enables the monitoring module to send
information directly to the application programs, or the
feature of collected [sic] information on the observed
application program for use by a service program" (Br17).
The Examiner points to (EA5-6) the following statement
(page 200, left column): "For test and debug purposes the
test software running of DTM phase 1-3 on the TMP can access
any data in the memory of the main processor to read and
modify variables of the tested system."
- 16 -
Page: Previous 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007