Ex parte HEFFNER et al. - Page 2




                     Appeal No. 1998-2643                                                                                                                                              
                     Application 08/549,349                                                                                                                                            


                     amendment dated June 13, 1997, Paper No. 9, entered as per the                                                                                                    
                     Advisory Action dated June 24, 1997, Paper No. 10; Answer,                                                                                                        
                     page 2).1                                                                                                                                                         
                                According to appellants, the invention is directed to a                                                                                                
                     method of applying multilayer coatings to a semiconductor                                                                                                         
                     integrated circuit by use of a thermal spray process for each                                                                                                     
                     coating (Brief, page 2).  Appellants fail to state whether the                                                                                                    
                     claims stand or fall together and have not presented any                                                                                                          
                     specific, substantive arguments to the separate patentability                                                                                                     
                     of any individual claim (Brief, page 4).  Pursuant to the                                                                                                         
                     provisions of 37 CFR § 1.192(c)(7)(1995), we select one claim                                                                                                     
                     from each group of claims rejected and decide this appeal as                                                                                                      
                     to each ground of rejection on the basis of this claim alone.                                                                                                     
                     Accordingly, we select claims 32 and 34 and review the                                                                                                            
                     examiner’s rejections on the basis of these claims alone.  A                                                                                                      
                     copy of illustrative claims 32 and 34 is attached as an                                                                                                           
                     Appendix to this decision.2                                                                                                                                       

                                1 We note that the amendment dated Sep. 4, 1997, Paper No.                                                                                             
                     13, was refused entry in the Advisory Action dated Sep. 15,                                                                                                       
                     1997, Paper No. 14.                                                                                                                                               
                                2We note that the copy of claim 38 in the Appendix to the                                                                                              
                     Brief, contrary to the Answer, page 3, ¶8, is incorrect.  The                                                                                                     
                                                                                          2                                                                                            





Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  13  14  15  Next 

Last modified: November 3, 2007