Appeal No. 2001-1791
Application No. 08/992,038
Claims 1, 4, 5, 6, 10, 11, and 14-18 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as
being unpatentable over INTERNET and Sitbon.
Claims 2, 3, and 12 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable
over INTERNET, Sitbon, and Rege.
Claims 7 and 8 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable over
INTERNET, Sitbon, and Li.
Claim 9 stands rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable over
INTERNET, Sitbon, Li, and Rege.
We refer to the Final Rejection (mailed Apr. 21, 2000) and the Examiner's
Answer (mailed Jan. 22, 2001) for a statement of the examiner's position and to the
Brief (filed Oct. 26, 2000) for appellants’ position with respect to the claims which stand
rejected.
OPINION
Appellants contest the examiner’s finding (Answer at 4) that Sitbon teaches, in
the language of claim 1, “wherein said load on each of said plurality of servers is
computed relative to a power rating of each of said plurality of servers.” Sitbon
describes, particularly at column 4, lines 10 through 34, calculating the load on each of
a plurality of servers using weighting factors dependent on the nature of the application
being run on the client. Of greater interest, however, are factors representing
percentage of utilization of each of the servers.
-3-
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007