Appeal No. 2002-1797
Application 09/129,38
Second, the examiner relies on Lipa's statement that "[t]he
connection assessment measurements are filtered so that any
events or actions that would degrade the accuracy of the data
are removed or compensated for " (emphasis added) (col. 8,
lines 19-22).
Appellants argue that this passage is directed only to the
assessment data processed by the server 115 and not the
client 122 (user terminal) or a fault tolerance service
associated therewith and, consequently, there is no suggestion to
modify the user configuration in any way if the user fails the
network performance assessment (Br4; RBr3).
The implicit argument by appellants is that "dynamically
adjusting" the operation of a service has to be the adjusting a
service on the client 122. Although the examiner states that
appellants interpret "dynamically adjusting" too narrowly because
there is nothing about the client in the claims (EA9), the
examiner does not point out where the service is that is adjusted
if it is not the client 122 in Lipa. However, the important
thing is that filtering and compensating does not cause anything
to be "dynamically adjusted": the filtering is done to improve
the accuracy of the performance assessment, not to dynamically
alter the working of the system. Again, the examiner
conspicuously fails to point out what is being dynamically
adjusted in response to the filtering.
- 8 -
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007