Appeal No. 2004-0933
Application 09/256,680
representation of the current system date and time (col. 2,
lines 56-59. The reset stamp is not an application component.
Thus, Pongracz does not teach the first step of claim 1.
The examiner finds that Pongracz teaches "tracing back
nested directories to find a target directory for each
application component in the linked list" at column 8,
lines 25-28 et seq. (FR2).
Appellants argue this passage teaches tracking reset stamps
using a linked list of reset stamps, and makes no mention of the
use of a linked list of application components (Br6-7). It is
argued that "[t]he passage relied upon by the Examiner does not
mention directories, nested directories, a target directory,
application components, application components in a linked list,
or the tracing of nested directories" (Br7) and that the examiner
has failed to provide any explanation of how tracking of reset
stamps using a linked list meets the limitation or how reset
stamps have any correlation with directories and application
components (Br7).
The examiner responds (EA5-6):
It is submitted that such teaching of searching or tracing
directories to find files pertaining to a requested
application is implicit and inherent from the cited textual
portions of Pongracz. . . . Further, it goes without saying
that in order to retrieve all files pertaining to a
requested application, the cited storages must be searched
- 8 -8
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007