【美專】teach away 相反教示

teach away 相反教示，當沒有答辯理由的時候常會被拿來用，不過看來好像一點都沒有用，因為教人往一個方向走，並不代表教人不要往另一個方向走。也許這是很簡單的道理，可是在沒有很清楚說不行的時候，總會忍不住想要拿來用用。我覺得還是不要亂用好了，不然給審查委員（因為小弟目前還不夠格遇不到法官）增加拒絕理由的內容，減少審查委員思考其他的理由的負擔，這樣比較來起很虧。

http://www.fedcir.gov/opinions/04-1252.pdf
"What the prior art teaches, whether it teaches away from the claimed invention, and whether it motivates a combination of teachings from different references are questions of fact." In re Fulton, 391 F.3d 1195, 1199-1200 (Fed. Cir. 2004).

What a reference teaches a person of ordinary skill is not, as Syntex's expert appears to believe, limited to what a reference specifically "talks about" or what is specifically "mentioned" or “written” in the reference. Under the proper legal standard, a reference will teach away when it suggests that the developments flowing from its disclosures are unlikely to produce the objective of the applicant's invention. In re Gurley, 27 F.3d 551, 553 (Fed. Cir. 1994). A statement that a particular combination is not a preferred embodiment does not teach away absent clear discouragement of that combination. In re Fulton, 391 F.3d at 1199-1200.

teaching 並不僅限於「what a reference specifically "talks about" or what is specifically "mentioned" or “written” in the reference」。