Appeal No. 96-1555
Application 08/229,619
OPINION
Rejection of claims 20-32, 34, and 37 sustained pro forma
Claims 1-8 and 11-37 are appealed (Br1). Appellant
states (Br1): "Of the claims on appeal, this brief is filed
in support of claims 1-8, 11, 15, 17-19, 33, and 35-36."
Since independent claim 20, and its dependent claims 21-32 and
34, and independent claim 37 are not addressed in the Brief,
and do not share the limitations about triangular mirrors
having an image axis and interior base angle less than 90E as
argued with respect to claims 1 and 36, we sustain the
rejection of these claims pro forma. See 37 CFR
§ 1.192(c)(8)(iv) (1995) (arguments must specify the errors in
the rejection). Dependent claims 12-14 and 16 are not
addressed in the Brief; however, these claims depend
indirectly from claim 1, which is argued in the Brief, and
they will be considered to stand or fall together with claim
1.
Obviousness
Claims 1-8, 11-19, 35, and 36
Appellant argues with respect to claim 1 that neither
Akins nor Coates discloses an arrangement of triangular
- 4 -
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007