Appeal No. 96-1455 Application No. 08/218,279 3 of the brief that appellants have grouped claims 1-18 and 25 as a first group and claims 19-24 as a second group. Appellants have provided separate arguments for patentability for each group as required. In accordance with 37 CFR § 1.192(c)(7), which was controlling at the time of appellants' filing of the brief, we consider claims 1-18 and 25 to stand or fall together, with claim 1 being considered the representative claim. 37 CFR § 1.192(c)(7) (July 1, 1995), as amended at 60 Fed. Reg. 14518 (March 17, 1995), 1173 Off. Gaz. Pat. & Trademark Office 62 (Apr. 11, 1995) states: Grouping of claims. For each ground of rejection which appellant contests and which applies to a group of two or more claims, the Board shall select a single claim from the group and shall decide the appeal as to the ground of rejection on the basis of that claim alone unless a statement is included that the claims of the group do not stand or fall together and, in the argument under paragraph (c)(8) of this section, appellant explains why the claims of the group are believed to be separately patentable. Merely pointing out differences in what the claims cover is not an argument as to why the claims are separately patentable. It is the burden of the Examiner to establish why one having ordinary skill in the art would have been led to the claimed invention by the reasonable teachings or suggestions -11-Page: Previous 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 NextLast modified: November 3, 2007