Appeal No. 2003-0302
Application No. 09/107,539
between the first and second storage unit through the storage
area network as recited in the claims.” For such a teaching, the
examiner turns to Yanai which discloses “the use of storage area
network to transfer data between a first and second storage unit
while bypassing the host [Col. 2, Lines 39-45]” (answer, page 4).
Based upon the teachings of Yanai, the examiner is of the opinion
(answer, page 4) that:
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary
skill in the art, having the teachings of Chin and
Yanai before him at the time the invention was made, to
modify the system of Chin to include using a storage
area network to transfer data between a first and
second storage unit while bypassing the host as taught
by Yanai because (1) it would have improved system
performance by permitting one data storage system to
read or write data to or from the other data storage
system; (2) it would have improved system performance
by releasing the host of the burden of writing the data
to a secondary storage system as taught by Yanai (3) it
would have increased system performance by increasing
available host bus bandwidth or by minimizing bus
contention.
Appellants argue (reply brief, pages 1, 3 and 4) that the
examiner has failed “to state a proper motivation for the
combination of the Chin and Yanai references under 35 U.S.C.
§ 103 and to support that motivation with proper evidence, as
required by governing law, such as In re Lee, 61 U.S.P.Q.2d 1430
(Fed. Cir. 2002),” and that “[e]ven if the combination of Chin
and Yanai is legally proper, the resulting combination does not
4
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007