Appeal 2006-3341
Application 10/266,491
Concerning official notice, we look to Zurko: “With respect to core
factual findings in a determination of patentability, however, the Board
cannot simply reach conclusions based on its own understanding or
experience-or on its assessment of what would be basic knowledge or
common sense. Rather, the Board must point to some concrete evidence in
the record in support of these findings.” In re Zurko 258 F.3d 1379, 1386, 59
USPQ2d 1693, 1697 (Fed. Cir., 2001)
ANALYSIS
Appellants have focused the remarks in their Brief on the elements of
the claims that are not explicitly named in the Van Der Meer reference. The
Examiner took official notice that the HDTV and the digital tuner were
common in this technology at the time of the invention, and supported that
position with teachings of the Auld reference and the common
understanding that digital television circuits usually included a digital tuner.
Remarks in the Van Der Meer reference itemized in the Findings of Fact
concerning digital processing of MPEG2 signals further supported the
Examiner’s view.
We conclude that claims 22 through 27, and 29 and 30 are properly
rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103(a) for being obvious over Van Der Meer.
Claims 28 and 31, as interpreted above regarding the “analog” limitation, are
also properly rejected for the same reason.
7
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next
Last modified: September 9, 2013