Appeal No. 1998-0066 Application 08/258,235 The Examiner glosses over the details of the claimed subject matter and provides conclusory statements in place of factual evidence of obviousness. In Krings, processor P1 is formed of two processors which are capable of checking each other and generating a fault message and stopping operation when a fault occurs (col. 4, lines 61-68). Similarly, processor P2 is provided with two processors which check each other (col. 5, lines 62-65). There is no indication that processor P2 sends a "system disconnection command" or that the processor P1 sends a "disconnection complete notice" to processor P2 when it has stopped operation. Aslanian is not directed to a backup system and so it is of no help. The Examiner merely concludes that providing the disconnection signals would have been obvious without stating where the motivation is found. The Examiner has not made a prima facie case that it would have been obvious for the backup processor to command the operating processor to disconnect and to provide the claimed signals and disconnection process. In addition, Aslanian discloses a memory dump process, but since it is not a backup system all that it says is that - 7 -Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 NextLast modified: November 3, 2007