Appeal No. 2004-1148
Application No. 09/374,694
The examiner (Answer, page 5) further rejects claims 1
through 5, 7, 8, 10, and 12 through 17 under 35 U.S.C. § 102(e)
over Rubin. The examiner contends (Answer, page 6) that Rubin
caches the copy of an information resource "in dependence upon a
semantic type (predefined or predetermined criteria) associated
with the resource."
Rubin discloses (column 2, lines 38-42) that the predefined
or predetermined criteria "may be any of many possible limitations
specified by a user or system developer. For example, the
predefined criteria may require that data objects pertain to
particular subject matter." An example given by Rubin (column 8,
lines 32-36) is that a buffer cache may be reserved for data
records relating to employees of an organization. Rubin discloses
(column 8, lines 63-65) that the user "binds objects meeting
predefined criteria . . . to particular buffer caches." Thus, the
caches are determined by fixed criteria, not by anything perceived
by the user. Therefore, Rubin, like the AAPA, fails to disclose
caching or processing a resource copy in dependence upon a
semantic type associated with the information resource.
Accordingly, we cannot sustain the anticipation rejection of
claims 1 through 5, 7, 8, 10, and 12 through 17 over Rubin.
6
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007