Appeal No. 2002-1337
Application No. 09/000-635
brief, page 9). Instead, Orbits merely evaluates the amount of free space in the CM so
that when the amount of free space is below a threshold, a predetermined number of
pages are placed on a list of pages to be replaced as new data is added to the CM.
We agree with appellants.
It does appear to us that Orbits is unconcerned with networks and downloading
of objects from a network to a client device, and so would be inapplicable to the instant
claimed invention. But, even if we agreed with the examiner’s interpretation of Orbits’
CPUs as client devices that download objects (column 5, lines 21-29, of Orbits does
indicate that the CPU associated with a CM region may access data either in that CM
region or from a remote CM region through global interconnect 12 so one might call the
CPU a “client device” which is capable of “downloading” data, or an object, from a
remote location), it is very clear to us that Orbitz does not disclose the removal of
cached objects to ensure that the amount of cache resource occupied by cached
objects associated with any given client device does not exceed a predetermined
threshold, as claimed. Instead, Orbits discloses, at column 12, lines 47-53, that
At prescribed intervals, the free memory of each coupled memory region
is evaluated to determine if it is below a threshold. If below the threshold,
a predetermined number of pages of the coupled memory region are scanned.
Infrequently used pages are placed on a list of pages that can be replaced
with pages stored in the storage medium.
5
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007