Appeal No. 96-3964
Application No. 08/225,228
Cir. 1984). These showings by the Examiner are an essential
part
of complying with the burden of presenting a prima facie case
of
obviousness. Note In re Oetiker, 977 F.2d 1443, 1445, 24
USPQ2d
1443, 1444 (Fed. Cir. 1992).
Appellants, at page 3 of the Brief, have identified two
sets of claims (i.e. claims 10-16 directed to a disk carrier
and claims 17-20 directed to a system for monitoring batches
of disks) which do not stand or fall together. Implicit in
Appellants' statement of the grouping of claims is that the
claims within each set do stand or fall together. As pointed
out previously, however, claims 17-20 have been canceled
leaving only the set of claims 10-16 directed to the disk
carrier on appeal. Consistent with this indication,
Appellants have made no separate arguments with respect to any
of the claims on appeal. Accordingly, all the claims before
us will stand or fall together. Note In re King, 801 F.2d
1324, 1325, 231 USPQ 136, 137 (Fed. Cir. 1986); In re
Sernaker, 702 F.2d 989, 991, 217 USPQ 1, 3 (Fed. Cir. 1983).
7
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007