Ex Parte LAURILA et al - Page 3




          Appeal No. 2002-2207                                                        
          Application 09/057,729                                                      


          OPINION                                                                     
          We have carefully considered the subject matter on                          
          appeal, the rejection advanced by the examiner and the evidence             
          of obviousness relied upon by the examiner as support for the               
          rejection.  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 answer.                                         
          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 1-14.  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 3].  Consistent with this indication                     
          appellants have made no separate arguments with respect to any of           
          the claims on appeal.  Accordingly, all the claims before us 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 989,           
          991, 217 USPQ 1, 3 (Fed. Cir. 1983).  Therefore, we will consider           

                                         -3-                                          





Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  Next 

Last modified: November 3, 2007