Appeal No. 2003-0873
Application No. 08/896,245 Page 8
communications server 22 spawns or otherwise generates CGI
102 to service client 12.
From these teachings of Smith, we find that a client makes an
initial connection, is assigned a unique session identifier, and
then receives the requested data. This CGI connection is then
terminated. If the client attempts to reestablish a connection
with the server, a second and unique CGI process is started to
handle this communication request. Since these transient CGI
processes terminate within a single session period, these CGI
processes do not remain persistent (Fig. 5, step 172 and 176).
The examiner’s position appears to be that since the session
manager of Smith is persistent, that it would have been obvious
to make the CGI persistent. However, we find no evidence to
support the examiner’s position that it would have been obvious
to make the CGI of Smith persistent. We are not persuaded by the
examiner’s assertion (answer, page 4) that ”it would have been a
simple variation to relocate/incorporate this [persistence]
subtask into the CGI process. The examiner’s unsupported
assertion is not a substitute for evidence.
In addition, we find no reason to make the CGI of Smith
persistent because to do so would require deletion of the session
manager which is an integral construct of Smith's invention.
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007