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 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007