Appeal No. 2006-1540
Application No. 10/113,338
data to a “particular” stripe unit, especially the specific
condition of a particular stripe unit being rebuilt during an
expansion process.
Further still, the claim finally requires “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.” Ohizumi “mirrors”
data in the sense that data is written to both a new disk and a
spare disk, but there is no description in Ohizumi or Menon of
the specifically claimed “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.”
Accordingly, we are of the view that the examiner has not
established a prima facie case of obviousness with regard to the
instant claimed subject matter and we will not sustain the
rejection of claims 1-20 under 35 U.S.C. § 103.
The examiner’s decision is reversed.
12
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007