Ex Parte 5694604 et al - Page 48


                Appeal 2007-2127                                                                                  
                Reexamination Control No. 90/006,621                                                              
                       (3) "preemptive time-sliced execution of a plurality of threads of                         
                       instructions located within the same software program"                                     
                       Preemptive time-sliced execution of a plurality of threads is                              
                interpreted to mean that a plurality of threads are subject to "preemptive                        
                time-sliced execution"; i.e., a plurality of threads are preempted to execute                     
                for a fixed timeslice.  Since a plurality of threads are preempted, a plurality                   
                of the threads must be "interruptible" (i.e., "capable of being interrupted" or                   
                "capable of being preempted") when their timeslice of execution expires.                          
                       "Interruptible" does not require that a thread is always interrupted,                      
                e.g., a thread may finish its subtask before the end of the timeslice and return                  
                control to the operating system and not be interrupted.  Nevertheless, it must                    
                be capable of being interrupted.  The district court interpreted "thread" to                      
                require a set of instructions that is capable of being interrupted and having                     
                its context stored, and interpreted "multithreading" to require that at least                     
                two threads are interruptible  Reiffin v. Microsoft, 270 F. Supp. 2d at 1142.                     
                The Examiner adopted the district court's reasoning (Final Rejection 73-74).                      
                       One of ordinary skill in computer art would appreciate that all                            
                executing threads in a preemptive multithreading system must be                                   
                "interruptible" when their timeslice is expired or "preemptive execution"                         
                would be meaningless.  This is consistent with the '604 patent, which states:                     
                "That is, each interrupt preempts an executing thread after the thread has                        
                executed at most for a brief timeslice during which the thread may have                           
                performed only a portion of its task" (emphasis added) ('604 patent, col. 1,                      
                lines 33-36).  It is also consistent with claim 1: "preempting an executing                       
                processing thread of said program in response to each actuation of said                           
                interrupt operation so as to terminate the timeslice of execution of said                         

                                                       48                                                         

Page:  Previous  41  42  43  44  45  46  47  48  49  50  51  52  53  54  55  Next

Last modified: September 9, 2013