Appeal 2007-1951
Application 10/120,016
Suresh B. Siddha, “A Persistent Snapshot Device Driver for Linux,”
Proceedings of the 5th Annual Linux Showcase &Conference. Nov. 5-
10, 2001.
REJECTIONS AT ISSUE
Claims 1 through 3, 5, 7, 8, 10, 14 through 16, 22, 23, 26 through 28,
and 30 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as being unpatentable over
Hitz in view of Siddha.
Claims 6 and 11 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as being
unpatentable over Hitz in view of Siddha and Brady.
Claims 9 and 32 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as being
unpatentable over Hitz in view of Siddha and West.
Claims 12, 13, 24, 25, 33, and 34 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C.
§ 103(a) as being unpatentable over Hitz in view of Siddha and Grummon.
Throughout the opinion, we make reference to the Brief (received
September 11, 2006), the Reply Brief (received December 26, 2006), and the
Answer (mailed November 1, 2006) for the respective details thereof.
ISSUES
Appellants contend that the Examiner’s rejection of claims 1 through
3, 5, 7, 8, 10, 14 through 16, 22, 23, 26 through 28, and 30 under 35 U.S.C.
§ 103(a) is in error. Appellants assert that modifying Hitz with the teaching
of Siddha as suggested by the Office action would change the principle
operation of Hitz. Appellants reasons that:
Hitz teaches that the system described therein operates because the
WAFL system always writes new data to an unused disk location
rather than to the currently used location. It is respectfully submitted
that modifying Hitz according to Siddha as suggested in the Office
3
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next
Last modified: September 9, 2013