Appeal No. 1997-2242 Page 4
Application No. 08/084,370
The prior art references of record relied upon by the
examiner in rejecting the appealed claims are:
Ewert et al. (Ewert) 5,166,936 Nov. 24, 1992
Jones et al. (Jones) 5,313,626 May 17, 1994
Chen et al., "RAID: High Performance, Reliable
Secondary Storage", ACM Computing Surveys, vol. 26,
no. 2, June 1994.
Claims 1-3 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being
unpatentable over Jones in view of Ewert.
Rather than reiterate the conflicting viewpoints advanced
by the examiner and the appellant regarding the above-noted
rejections, we make reference to the examiner’s answer (Paper
No. 14, mailed January 21, 1997) and the final rejection
(Paper No. 6, mailed April 7, 1995) for the examiner’s
complete reasoning in support of the rejections, and to the
appellant’s brief (Paper No. 15, filed January 22, 1996) and
reply brief (Paper No. 17, filed March 24, 1997) for the
appellant’s arguments thereagainst. Only those arguments
actually made by the appellant have been considered in this
decision. Arguments which the appellant could have made but
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007