Appeal No. 2006-1056
Application No. 10/606,514
Since we find that Nizar does disclose the claimed subject
matter as broadly recited in the independent claims, we will
sustain the rejection of claims 1, 13, and 25 under 35 U.S.C.
§ 102(e).
With regard to claims 2, 14, and 26, the examiner refers to
the cover figure, and column 1, lines 29-32, of Nizar for a
controller adapted to receive an access request; column 2, lines
1-14, and column 12, lines 3-28, for calculating the temperature
estimate in accordance with the access request; and column 5,
lines 50-63, and column 3, lines 4-25, for determining if the
temperature estimate exceeds a temperature threshold, and
imposing an access request budget if the temperature estimate
exceeds the temperature threshold. See page 4 of the answer.
At pages 6-10 of the principal brief, appellants contend
that the examiner has not clearly set forth the reasoning anent
the rejection of claims 2, 14, and 26. We disagree.
The examiner has pointed to the cover figure of Nizar, where
an access request is received (see access request 106). The
calculation of the temperature estimate in accordance with the
10
Page: Previous 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007