Appeal No. 2004-1082
Application No. 09/106,166
request for an update to the state information. The examiner
cites column 9, lines 32-67, of Alonso for a teaching of
generating a notification of the update to the application, i.e.,
confirmation of modifications. Finally, the examiner identifies
column 10, lines 30-64, of Alonso, as teaching dynamically
switching (i.e., the change in operating mode can ensue
automatically) between an optimistic notification mode and a
pessimistic notification mode.
It is appellants’ view that Alonso fails to teach the
claimed “dynamically switching between an optimistic notification
mode and a pessimistic notification mode.” In particular,
appellants contend that the examiner has erroneously analogized
the “notifications” of the instant claimed invention with the
“confirmations” and “information about the modifications of the
shared data” disclosed by Alonso. At page 4 of the principal
brief, appellants argue that Alonso’s “confirmations” are like
acknowledgments in that they are performed synchronously in
response to a particular request or action which has been taken,
such as a modification of shared data, and that a confirmation is
always received by the party initiating the request or action.
Appellants contrast this to a “notification,” as used in the
instant invention, which is an autonomous message, from the
-4-
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007