Appeal No. 2003-1877
Application No. 09/375,071
objects B and C essentially switch places. Nowhere, however,
does Sherman disclose designating regions as first and end of
file regions, respectively, and then "redesignating" the first
region as a new end of file region.
The examiner (Answer, page 3) directs our attention to
column 2, line 60-column 3, line 4, and column 4, lines 28-32, of
Sherman as a disclosure of redesignating the first region as a
new end of file region. However, the referenced portion of
columns 2 and 3 merely explains that the system uses a pointer to
the first object to locate objects in the container. Then,
Sherman teaches in column 4 that when the edited object B is
written to the container, it is given an "end-of-container"
address. Even if the end-of-container address were to be
considered an end of file designation, since that location was
not previously designated as a first region, Sherman fails to
disclose "redesignating" a first region as a new end of file
region.
In the Response to Arguments section of the Answer, the
examiner (Answer, page 11) copies column 4, lines 12-22, of
Sherman, asserting that Sherman's passing of a starting and an
ending address of the target object equates to the claimed
redesignating. The examiner states (Answer, page 11) that "[t]he
4
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007