Appeal No. 2002-0382
Application No. 09/133,878
storing a table containing a table entry for each program
instruction that is to be remediated, each table entry containing
one or more remediation parameters;
detecting a program location corresponding to an instruction
to be remediated while executing the program; and
upon detecting a program location corresponding to an
instruction to be remediated, executing the instruction to be
remediated in accordance with the remediation parameters in the
table entry corresponding to the instruction to be remediated.
The prior art reference of record relied upon by the
examiner in rejecting the appealed claims is:
Roth et al. (Roth) 5,878,422 Mar. 02, 1999
(filed Apr. 09, 1997)
Claims 1 through 29 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as
being unpatentable over Roth.
Reference is made to the Final Rejection (Paper No. 9,
mailed January 4, 2001) and the Examiner's Answer (Paper No. 13,
mailed August 22, 2001) for the examiner's complete reasoning in
support of the rejections, and to appellants' Brief (Paper
No. 12, filed June 15, 2001) for appellants' arguments
thereagainst.
OPINION
We have carefully considered the claims, the applied prior
art references, and the respective positions articulated by
2
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007