Appeal No. 1999-1583
Application No. 08/377,390
prior art to an indefinite claim must rely on mere
speculation.
Even assuming the examiner understood the claim language
enough to apply the cited reference(s), the examiner indicates
that the evidence of the “independent” nature of the
processes, as claimed, lies in “columns two-three” [answer-
page 4]. In particular, the examiner cites
the fault tolerant computing system will
detect faults in an application process which
cause the application processes to crash or
hang... The fault tolerant computing system
will include at least one watchdog for
monitoring application process, In
addition...will include a restart subsystem
for executing recovery algorithms which will
attempt to bypass detected
faults...appropriate functions from a fault
tolerant library, into the code for the
application process...checkpointing function,
...fault tolerant writes and reads...logging
of messages received... [answer-page 4].
The examiner then concludes that “[a]ll of these functions
monitor services processes and are not dependent upon the
origination of the processes” [answer-page 4].
At page 5 of the answer, the examiner further explains
that
Figures 4a-4b, show clearly that the
9–
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007