Ex Parte LECRONE et al

Patent Trial and Appeal Board

Jun 14, 2016

13275706 (P.T.A.B. Jun. 14, 2016)

UNITED STA TES p A TENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
APPLICATION NO. FILING DATE
13/275,706 10/18/2011
52427 7590 06/14/2016
MUIRHEAD AND SATURNELLI, LLC
200 FRIBERG PARKWAY, SUITE 1001
WESTBOROUGH, MA 01581
FIRST NAMED INVENTOR
Douglas E. LECRONE
UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
United States Patent and Trademark Office
Address: COMMISSIONER FOR PATENTS
P.O. Box 1450
Alexandria, Virginia 22313-1450
www .uspto.gov
ATTORNEY DOCKET NO. CONFIRMATION NO.
EMS-082USCON1 8780
EXAMINER
RUTZ, JARED IAN
ART UNIT PAPER NUMBER
2133
MAILDATE DELIVERY MODE
06/14/2016 PAPER
Please find below and/or attached an Office communication concerning this application or proceeding.
The time period for reply, if any, is set in the attached communication.
PTOL-90A (Rev. 04/07)
UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
Ex parte DOUGLAS E. LECRONE, GARY H. COX, BRETT A. QUINN,
DAVID MEIRI, MARK J. HALSTEAD, and BENJAMIN W. YODER
Appeal2014-007340
Application 13/275,706
Technology Center 2100
Before CARL W. WHITEHEAD JR., JEFFREY S. SMITH, and
DANIEL N. FISHMAN, Administrative Patent Judges.
WHITEHEAD JR., Administrative Patent Judge.
DECISION ON APPEAL
STATEMENT OF THE CASE
Appellants are appealing the Final Rejection of claims 31-35 and 37-
41under35 U.S.C. § 134(a). Appeal Brief2. Claims 1-30 and 36 are
cancelled. Id. We have jurisdiction under 35 U.S.C. § 6(b) (2012).
We affirm.
Introduction
The invention is directed to transferring data between storage devices.
Representative Claim (disputed limitations emphasized)
3 1. A method for an intermediate storage device to facilitate
storing recovery data, the method comprising:
Appeal2014-007340
Application 13/275,706
receiving a first set of data from a local storage device
corresponding to writes to the local storage device that are
synchronously transferred to the intermediate storage device;
receiving an indicator corresponding to a second set of
data transferred from the local storage device to a remote
storage device, wherein the second set of data is
asynchronously transferred from the local storage device to the
remote storage device; and
maintaining at least one map that indicates differences
between portions of the first set of data and portions of the
second set of data.
Rejection on Appeal
Claims 31-35 and 37--41 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. §102(e) as
being anticipated by Micka et al. (US Patent Application Publication
Number 2005/0251633 Al; published November 10, 2005). Final Rejection
3-9.
ANALYSIS
Rather than reiterate the arguments of Appellants and the Examiner,
we refer to the Appeal Brief (filed January 24, 2014), the Reply Brief (filed
June 18, 2014), the Answer (mailed April 24, 2014), and the Final Rejection
(mailed May 15, 2013) for the respective details. We have considered in this
decision only those arguments Appellants actually raised in the Briefs.
We have reviewed the Examiner's rejections in light of Appellants'
arguments that the Examiner has erred. We adopt as our own (1) the
findings and reasons set forth by the Examiner in the action from which this
appeal is taken and (2) the reasons set forth by the Examiner in the
Examiner's Answer in response to Appellants' Appeal Brief, except where
noted.
2
Appeal2014-007340
Application 13/275,706
Appellants contend that:
[T]he change track array (370) of Micka only contains changes
that were made since synchronization using the copy track array
(375) had been started since the change track array (370) is
cleared at the start of the synchronization process using the copy
track array (375). Thus, the changed track array (370) would not
be a map that indicates differences between the data
synchronously provided to an intermediate storage device (first
set of data) and data asynchronously provided from a local
storage device to a remote storage device (second set of data), as
recited in the present independent claims.
Appeal Brief 9.
However the Examiner finds Micka teaches:
[MJaintaining at least one map that indicates differences
between portions of the first set of data and portions of the
second set of data. Paragraph 0068 shows that the location of
written data is recorded to changed track array 385 of
synchronous mirror system 3 15, and accordingly shows
differences between the data currently written and the data
previously written.
T"""'I. 1 T""ti. • ' • Al
t