Ex Parte Finch - Page 6



          Appeal No. 2003-0205                                                        
          Application 09/504,502                                                      

          that is verified.  This verification step also includes verifying           
          the authenticity of the asset.  The examiner, however, has not              
          established that the disclosure of verifying the authenticity of            
          the asset includes, either expressly or inherently, a disclosure            
          of verifying the old ownership data before it is replaced by the            
          new ownership data.                                                         
               The examiner argues that the appellant has admitted (parent            
          application no. 08/960,492, response filed January 4, 2000, paper           
          no. 8, pages 2-4), in response to a nonenablement rejection, that           
          a title record and a bill of sale both include the seller’s name,           
          and that to enhance the title process in the appellant’s method a           
          comparison of ownership data in the bill of sale to ownership               
          data in the title record must be made (answer, pages 9-10).  The            
          examiner, however, has not established that Rose, Jr. discloses,            
          either expressly or inherently, this title process enhancing                
          step.                                                                       
               For the above reasons we find that the examiner has not                
          carried the burden of establishing a prima facie case of                    
          anticipation of the appellant’s claimed method.                             




                                          6                                           




Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  Next 

Last modified: November 3, 2007