Appeal No. 1997-3499
Application 08/366,281
does not suggest the use of its output in the manner recited
in the rejected claims. It is stated emphatically that the
prior art fails to teach using a scrubbing means as an element
or as the performer of a step in the detection of a virus."
We agree with Appellants. Utilizing the scrubbing means
of Ryan in combination with the virus detector in Arnold
and/or Watson does not suggest the limitation at issue that
the scrubbing means provides data to a virus signature
detection process. As Appellants note, the scrubbing means
would function as an independent background process, separate
from whatever mechanism is used to read out data to perform
the virus checking. That data is provided to the CPU by the
memory controller, as stated by Appellants at page 13 of the
brief, does not imply that data is provided to the CPU by the
memory scrubber part of the memory controller. The memory
scrubber means reads out, tests, and rewrites addresses
containing a single soft error with correct data independently
(autonomously) from the part of the memory controller that
reads out data for the CPU.
The Examiner recognizes that claim 1 recites that the
memory scrubber means provides data to the detection processes
- 8 -
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007