Appeal No. 2006-1707
Application No. 09/964,029
permissions and ownership for each file and directory manipulated
by the patch in addition to other information such as operating
system type, version and architecture (page 5). Therefore, even
if this element of claim 6 relates to two different actions, we
find that to the extent disclosed, both actions are described in
the reference.
Appellants further argue that element #21 also includes two
separate actions of “determining which of the vendor’s software
patches should be installed by determining the needed vendor’s
software patches,” ... “and the not needed vendor’s software
patches” (brief, page 10; reply brief, page 5). Appellants assert that
the reference does not teach the portion related to determining the “not needed
vendor’s software patches (brief, page 10). In response, the Examiner points out that it
is inherent that by determining the software patches that are needed, those that are not
needed will also be determined (answer, page 9). Pointing to portions in pages 4, 6,
and 9 of Bartoletti, the Examiner argues that choosing the patches that are not installed
reads on determining the patches that are not needed (answer, page 10).
Although the Examiner’s characterization of the not needed patches, appears to
encompass the not needed as well as the not chosen patches, the system manager is
described as knowing which patches are needed for each system (page 3, paragraph
3). Therefore, once those that are needed are determined, everything else will be in the
9
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007