Appeal No. 97-0176
Application No. 08/313,604
No. 15, mailed August 8, 1996) for the examiner's complete
reasoning in support of the rejections, and to the appellants'
brief (Paper No. 14, filed June 17, 1996) and reply brief
(Paper No. 16, filed September 20, 1996) for the appellants'
arguments thereagainst.
In the main brief (page 5), appellants state that claims
2, 4, 5 and 7 stand or fall with claim 1 and that independent
claims 1 and 9 do not stand or fall together. Appellants also
state that claims 3, 6, 8 and 10 do not stand or fall
together. Appellants, however, have not presented separate
arguments for each of claims 3, 6, 8 and 10. Therefore,
claims 3, 6, 8 and 10 stand or fall together. 37 CFR §
1.192(c)(7).
OPINION
In reaching our decision in this appeal, we have given
careful consideration to the appellants' specification and
claims, to the applied prior art references, and to the
respective positions articulated by the appellants and the
examiner. As a consequence of our review, we make the
determinations which follow.
-4-
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007