Appeal No. 1997-2242 Page 13
Application No. 08/084,370
moves the remapped track back to its original
location. Neither of the two, however, discloses a
method of "unfolding" a fully folded array to
restore the array to its former fully redundant
condition as claimed by the applicant.
As stated by the court in In re Hiniker Co., 150 F.3d
1362, 1369, 47 USPQ2d 1523, 1529 (Fed. Cir. 1998) “[t]he name
of the game is the claim.” Claims will be given their
broadest reasonable interpretation consistent with the
specification, and limitations appearing in the specification
are not to be read into the claims. In re Etter, 756 F.2d
852, 858, 225 USPQ 1, 5 (Fed. Cir. 1985).
Claims 1-3 recite the following limitations:
Claim 1
determining if said failed disk contains all
parity chunks;
if said failed disk contains all parity chunks,
terminating said method;
if said failed disk contains at least some data
chunks, then for each strip containing a data chunk
located on said failed disk, regenerating the data
of said data chunk located on said failed disk and
writing said regenerated data onto said parity chunk
associated with said data chunk of said failed disk
to form a fully folded array.
Page: Previous 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007