Appeal No. 1998-2148
Application 08/764,783
1.192(a) as amended at 60 Fed. Reg. 14518 (Mar. 17, 1995),
which was controlling at the time of Appellants' filing the
brief, states as follows:
The brief . . . must set forth the
authorities and arguments on which the
appellant will rely to maintain the appeal.
Any arguments or authorities not included
in the brief may be refused consideration
by the Board of [P]atent Appeals and
Interferences, unless good cause is shown.
Also, 37 CFR § 1.192(c)(8)(iv) states:
For each rejection under 35 U.S.C. 103,
the argument shall specify the errors in
the rejection and, if appropriate, the
specific limitations in the rejected claims
which are not described in the prior art
relied on in the rejection, and shall
explain how such limitations render the
claimed subject matter unobvious over the
prior art. If the rejection is based upon
a combination of references, the argument
shall explain why the references, taken as
a whole, do not suggest the claimed subject
matter, and shall include, as may be
appropriate, an explanation of why features
disclosed in one reference may not properly
be combined with features disclosed in
another reference. A general argument that
all the limitations are not described in a
single reference does not satisfy the
requirements of this paragraph.
Thus, 37 CFR § 1.192 provides that just as the court is not
13
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007