Appeal No. 96-0384 Page 3
Application No. 08/106,252
Basol et al. (Basol) 4,950,615 Aug. 21,
1990
Claims 1-7, 15-19, and 21 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C.
§ 103 as being unpatentable over Jack in view of Basol.
OPINION
Having carefully considered each of appellants*
arguments, we are not persuaded of reversible error on the
part of the examiner. Accordingly, we will sustain this
rejection. We add the following comments for emphasis.
Appellants have not grouped the appealed claims
separately or provided a separate argument for any particular
claim on appeal. Accordingly, the appealed claims stand or
fall together. In re Young, 927 F.2d 588, 590, 18 USPQ2d
1089, 1091 (Fed. Cir. 1991): In re Nielson, 816 F.2d 1567,
1571, 2 USPQ2d 1525, 1527 (Fed. Cir. 1987); In re Kaslow, 707
F.2d 1366, 1376, 217 USPQ 1089, 1096 (Fed. Cir. 1983). We
will direct our comments primarily to claim 1.
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007