Appeal No. 2005-1243
Application No. 10/017,739
The filtering capability of McCreery is taught throughout this
reference to be able to select/specify computer/nodes/events. Indeed,
specific packets may be captured representative of heterogeneous data or
events. Note column 5, lines 15-20; column 6, lines 65-67; column 8, lines
1-9; column 12, lines 22-38 and column 13, lines 57-60. These are
consistent with appellant’s contemplation of events in the specification at
pages 9, 11 and 12.
Correspondingly, the captured data is sorted by nodes by the packet
analysis section 220 in Figure 2 and the data sorter 340 in Figure 4c as well
as the sorting and filtering module 362 in Figure 4d. The compare
functions are analogous to a sorting operation as discussed at column 8,
lines 45-49 and column 14, beginning at line 17. The application of rules
feature at the end of claim 1 on appeal is taught by the use of the
inference analyzer 358 in Figure 4d and the discussion at column 2,
lines 43-46; column 5, lines 48-53 and column 7, lines 50-59.
The additional assertion at page 7 of the principal brief on appeal
that McCreery does not take any actions based on the events detected is
misplaced. Even as asserted by the examiner in the Statement of the
-5-
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007