Appeal No. 2006-1056
Application No. 10/606,514
request budget if the temperature estimate exceeds the
temperature threshold. Clearly, in Nizar, if the thermal
specification of the device is exceeded, restrictions on access
requests (throttling) are imposed.
Thus, we will sustain the rejection of claims 4, 16, and 28
under 35 U.S.C. § 102(e).
Claims 5, 17, and 29 require the calculation of a “new”
access request budget each time the access request budget is
imposed and claims 6, 18, and 30 require the calculation of a
“new” access request budget “periodically”. The examiner points
to column 8, lines 63-65 of Nizar for such a teaching. However,
this portion of Nizar merely mentions that a budget is allocated
for “each and every read throttling monitoring window.” We find
nothing therein relative to modifying an “access request budget.”
While Nizar does appear to disclose an access request budget
imposed when the thermal specification of the device is
approached or exceeded, the examiner has indicated nothing in
Nizar suggestive of modifying this “budget” each time the access
request budget is imposed or even periodically.
Accordingly, we will not sustain the rejection of claims 5,
17, 18, 29 and 30 under 35 U.S.C. § 102(e). It follows, then,
13
Page: Previous 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007