Appeal No. 98-1183 Page 4
Application No. 08/352,513
OPINION
Initially we note that the appellant on page 4 of the
brief has grouped the claims as standing or falling together
in the following manner: Group I, claims 1 through 7 and 9,
and Group II, claims 8 and 10 through 13. However, the
appellant has provided a separate argument on page 9 of the
brief for the patentability of claim 13. Accordingly, we will
not treat claim 13 as being within the second grouping of
claims. Instead claim 13 will be treated separately. In
accordance with 37 CFR
§ 1.192(c)(7), we have selected claim 1 as the representative
claim from Group I and claim 8 as the representative claim
from Group II. Thus, we will review claims 1, 8 and 13 to
decide the appeal on the rejection under 35 U.S.C. § 103.
In reaching our decision in this appeal, we have given
careful consideration to the appellant's specification and
claims, to the applied prior art references, and to the
respective positions articulated by the appellant and the
examiner. Upon evaluation of all the evidence before us, it
is our conclusion that the evidence adduced by the examiner is
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007