Appeal No. 2006-1359
Application No. 10/098,417
Hedges, 783 F.2d 1038, 1039, 228 USPQ 685, 686 (Fed. Cir. 1986); In re Piasecki, 745 F.2d
1468, 1472, 223 USPQ 785, 788 (Fed. Cir. 1984); and In re Rinehart, 531 F.2d 1048, 1052,
189 USPQ 143, 147 (CCPA 1976). Only those arguments actually made by appellant have
been considered in this decision. Arguments which appellant could have made but chose not
to make in the briefs have not been considered and are deemed to be waived. See 37 C.F.R.
§ 41.37(c)(1)(vii) (2004).
At the outset, we note that the primary Pothapragada reference is directed to a system
and method of intelligent virtual volume access that manages storage space in one or more
data storage devices using tables containing attributes associated with the data storage
devices [col. 1, lines 60-67]. When a request specifying criteria for storage space is received
from a requester, the Pothapragada invention selects one of the data storage devices whose
attributes best match the one or more criteria [id.]. An identification associated with a
portion of the selected data storage is returned to the requester, and a communication path is
created between the requester and the selected data storage device [col. 1, line 67, cont’d col.
2, lines 1-4]. The preferred embodiment of the Pothapragada invention implements Storage
Area Network (SAN) storage devices; however, Pothapragada discloses intelligent Network
Attached Storage (NAS) devices that function as servers in the background of the invention
section [col. 1, lines 15-48].
The secondary Inohara reference is directed to an information processing and electronic
commerce system that features a file format conversion method that enables a plurality of
-5-
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007