Appeal No. 94-3812
Application 07/857,701
from the claims of Bilkadi considered with Reilly, Jr. Claims
1, 4, 5, 8, 9, 11, 14, 16, 30 and 34 stand rejected under 35
U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable from the disclosure of
Kojima considered with Dessauer and Aoyama. Claims 1, 4, 5,
8, 9, 11, 14, 16, 30 and 34 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. §
103 as being unpatentable from the disclosure in Lucey
considered with Dessauer.
Except for the arguments at pages 19 and 20 of
appellant's brief (Paper Number 29) concerning the rejection
of claims 4, 5, 11, 14 and 16 under 35 U.S.C. § 103 ,4
appellants have failed to argue with any reasonable degree of
specificity the patentability of any other claim.
Accordingly, except for the above-noted claims, the
patentability of all the claims stands or falls with
independent claim 1 and we shall decide the patentability of
all the claims based on the patentability of claim 1. In re
Nielson, 816 F.2d 1567, 1572, 2 USPQ2d 1525, 1528 (Fed. Cir.
1987); In re Kroekel, 803 F.2d 705, 709, 231 USPQ 640, 642
(Fed. Cir. 1986). See also 37 CFR 1.192(c)(7), first sentence.
Appellant's separate arguments concerning Claims 6, 7,4
10, 13, 15, 18, 23 and 24 are moot since these claims are not
rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103.
7
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007