Appeal No. 1997-0322
Application 08/014,574
for the rejections. We have, likewise, reviewed and taken
into consideration, in reaching our decision, the appellants’
arguments set forth in the briefs along with the examiner’s
rationale in support of the rejection and arguments in
rebuttal set forth in the examiner’s answers.
It is our view, after consideration of the record
before us, that the evidence relied upon and the level of
skill in the particular art would not have suggested to one of
ordinary skill in the art the obviousness of the invention as
set forth in claims 15, 16, 19, 20, 22 and 23. Accordingly,
we reverse.
Appellants have indicated that for purposes of this
appeal the claims will all stand or fall together as a single
group [brief, page 7]. Consistent with this indication
appellants have made no separate arguments with respect to any
of the claims on appeal. Since there are several rejections
before us, appellants’ grouping will be accepted as a
representation that all the claims within each rejection will
stand or fall together. Note In re King, 801 F.2d 1324, 1325,
231 USPQ 136, 137 (Fed. Cir. 1986); In re Sernaker, 702 F.2d
6
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007