Appeal No. 2002-2218
Application 09/322,698
the discussion in the background at columns 1 and 2 of Goldring
would perhaps lead the reader to conclude that read operations
are within the general context of Goldring's teachings, it is
very clear from the substantive discussion of the system
beginning at columns 5 and 6 that Goldring is concerned only with
updates, database changes or change operations, all of which
appear to us and to the appellants to involve in some manner
write operations rather than the claimed read operations. It
appears to us that Goldring not only does not teach read
identifiers to determine an age of an oldest active transaction
as asserted by the examiner in the paragraph bridging pages 4 and
5 of the answer, but also that there appears to be no teaching of
read identifiers set forth in the context of claim 1 on appeal.
That the activity log 32 in Figure 2 may be read by a log read
processor 40 does not necessarily indicate that read identifiers
per se as required by representative claim 1 on appeal are taught
or suggested in this reference.
We have similar observations with respect to Mohan. The
discussion of transaction processing beginning at column 1,
line 12, relates only to changes of data or updates of data
5
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007