Appeal No. 2004-2267 Page 4
Application No. 09/651,184
generating commands to remove data files from the temporary
directory upon passage of the time delay.
Claims 1-3, 5-10, and 13-21 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 102(b) as
anticipated by U.S. Patent No. 5,999,943 ("Nori"). Claims 4, 11, 12, and 22 stand
rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as obvious over Nori and U.S. Patent Application
Publ'n No. 2001/0011276 ("Durst").
OPINION
Our opinion addresses the rejections in the following order:
• anticipation rejection of claims 1-3, 5-10, and 13-21
• obviousness rejection of claims 4, 11, 12, and 22.
A. ANTICIPATION REJECTION OF CLAIMS 1-3, 5-10, AND 13-21
Rather than reiterate the positions of the examiner or the appellant in toto, we
focus on the point of contention therebetween. The examiner asserts, "[b]y checking
the waiting list to determined whether the predetermined wait time of the client has not
elapsed, the server performs the claimed limitation of reviewing the time stamps to
determine if a predetermined time delay has passed (see col. 13, lines 25-50)."
(Examiner's Answer at 8.) He finds, "[w]hen a client reads LOB data, changes that have
been made to the LOB data must be removed from the LOB data before the LOB data
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007