Appeal No. 2004-1899
Application No. 09/608,469
the file transfer or replication procedure is placed on hold in an “open-file” queue. It is
only when the file is closed that it becomes available for the replication operation, after
which it is again closed and available for access by other applications. It is apparent to
us, from the disclosure of Beeler, that client read/write access to the file system is to the
source server since, as indicated by Beeler, the file to be transferred or replicated may
remain open on the source server during the file transfer operation (Beeler, column 6,
lines 18-27 and column 18, lines 37-44).
We recognize that the Examiner, at page 7 of the Answer, has cited several
portions of Beeler as allegedly describing file system user access through the target
server concurrently with file system transfer. We agree with Appellants, however, that
none of these cited portions supports the Examiner’s position. Further, we find the
record before us totally devoid of any support for the Examiner’s further assertion that,
in Beeler, “the target server by default must be capable of interacting with users and at
the very least, read and accept user requests even if replicating is taking place to avoid
an error or deadlock.” (Answer, page 7). The Examiner must not only make requisite
findings, based on the evidence of record, but must also explain the reasoning by which
the findings are deemed to support the asserted conclusion. See In re Lee, 277 F.3d
1338, 1343, 61 USPQ2d 1430, 1433-34 (Fed. Cir. 2002).
5
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007