Appeal No. 1996-3193
Application 08/160,112
Appellants argue "Taniguchi fails to teach the formation of
the claimed 'sum of the absolute value of the difference'"
(Br7). The Examiner recognized this difference and addressed
it. Appellants do not address the Examiner's finding or
conclusion.
It is proper for an examiner to make a finding of "well
known" prior art if the knowledge is of such notorious
character that Official Notice can be taken. Manual of Patent
Examining Procedure § 706.02(a) (5th ed., Rev. 14, Nov. 1992),
now in § 2144.03 (6th ed., Rev. 3, July 1997). It takes very
little on the part of an applicant to traverse such a finding.
Applicant need merely assert for the record that the examiner
is wrong or that the applicant is not aware that the fact is
well known, i.e., either deny or state that he is without
knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the
truth of the finding, similar to responding in an answer to
the claims of a complaint under Fed. R. Civ. P. 8(b). That
way the Patent and Trademark Office does not spend time
proving matters which are, in fact, known by the applicant.
The examiner should then produce evidence to support the
finding. Challenging the existence of well known prior art by
- 6 -
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007