Ex Parte Fore et al - Page 2



         Appeal No. 2006-1540                                                       
         Application No. 10/113,338                                                 

              Representative independent claim 1 is reproduced as follows:          
              1.      A method for performing an expansion of a disk                
              array comprising the steps of:                                        
                   rebuilding stripe units in a disk in said disk array             
              stripe by stripe, wherein each disk in said disk array                
              comprises a plurality of stripe units, wherein a stripe               
              is a group of corresponding stripe units from each disk               
              in said disk array;                                                   
                   receiving a request to write data to a particular                
              stripe unit in said disk during an expansion process;                 
                   writing said data in said particular stripe unit in              
              said disk if said particular stripe unit was rebuilt during           
              said expansion process; and                                           
                   mirroring said data to a stripe unit that corresponds            
              to said particular stripe unit in a same stripe if said               
              particular stripe unit was rebuilt during said expansion              
              process, wherein said mirror stripe unit is located in                
              another disk of said disk array.                                      
              The examiner relies on the following references:                      
              Menon et al. (Menon)     5,258,984      Nov. 02, 1993                 
              Ohizumi             5,357,509           Oct. 18, 1994                 
              Claims 1-20 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as                   
         unpatentable over Ohizumi in view of Menon.                                
              Reference is made to the briefs and answer for the                    
         respective positions of appellants and the examiner.                       





                                         2                                          



Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  13  14  Next 

Last modified: November 3, 2007