Appeal No. 1996-3193
Application 08/160,112
arguing that the fact is not supported by a reference, without
stating that the examiner is wrong or that applicant is
without knowledge of the prior art teaching does not
constitute a proper traverse.
The Examiner's finding that running sums were well known
in the prior art is not the kind of fact which lends itself to
Official Notice. Although we agree that accumulation of sums
was well known in the field of computer arithmetic, using
Official Notice instead of supplying a reference is a
difficult fact to review in any subsequent judicial review
where the judges will not have the technical background of the
examiner, the applicant, or the Board panel. Cf.
In re Ahlert, 424 F.2d 1088, 1091, 165 USPQ 418, 420 (CCPA
1970)("Assertions of technical facts in areas of esoteric
technology must always be supported by citation to some
reference work recognized as standard in the pertinent art.");
accord In re Pardo, 684 F.2d 912, 917, 214 USPQ 673, 677 (CCPA
1982). However, since the Examiner has continuously
maintained his position and Appellants have not argued that
the Examiner erred, we conclude that adding the absolute value
- 7 -
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007