Appeal No. 1997-0322 Application 08/014,574 for the rejections. We have, likewise, reviewed and taken into consideration, in reaching our decision, the appellants’ arguments set forth in the briefs along with the examiner’s rationale in support of the rejection and arguments in rebuttal set forth in the examiner’s answers. It is our view, after consideration of the record before us, that the evidence relied upon and the level of skill in the particular art would not have suggested to one of ordinary skill in the art the obviousness of the invention as set forth in claims 15, 16, 19, 20, 22 and 23. Accordingly, we reverse. Appellants have indicated that for purposes of this appeal the claims will all stand or fall together as a single group [brief, page 7]. Consistent with this indication appellants have made no separate arguments with respect to any of the claims on appeal. Since there are several rejections before us, appellants’ grouping will be accepted as a representation that all the claims within each rejection 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 6Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 NextLast modified: November 3, 2007