Appeal No. 1999-1583
Application No. 08/377,390
control means in Figures 4a, 4b and column 11, lines 35 et
seq.
We find that the examiner’s rationale fails to establish
a prima facie case of anticipation. Claim 3 calls for a
plurality of export processes, a monitor process associated
with the function being performed across the plurality of
service processes which service processes run independently of
the monitor process, and a control means for instantiating a
new export process if a message received by the monitor
process from the export processes indicates that one or more
of the service processes being monitored has failed.
The examiner has not particularly pointed out where each
of these claimed elements and their interconnection, resulting
in the claimed functions, is found in Fuchs. A mere general
reference to various figures and to various columns and lines
“et seq.”, without specifically pointing out the
correspondence between the claimed elements and those
disclosed by Fuchs is not sufficient to establish
anticipation.
The claim calls for service processes which run
independently of the monitor process and appellants argue this
7–
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007