Appeal No. 97-3195
Application 08/387,419
Claims 4 through 6 and 11 through 17 stand rejected under 35
U.S.C. § 103(a) as being unpatentable over Sanders in view of
Griffin.
The full text of the examiner's rejections and response to
the argument presented by appellant appears in the answer (Paper
No. 17), while the complete statement of appellant’s argument can
be found in the main and reply briefs (Paper Nos. 16 and 19).2
In the “GROUPING OF THE CLAIMS” section of the main brief
(page 11), appellant indicates that the rejected claims do not
stand or fall together. Independent claim 1 is separately
argued. However, as to independent claims 4 and 11, they
are argued together. Thus, in accordance with 37 CFR §
1.192(c)(7), we select claim 4 for review, and claim 11 shall
stand or fall therewith. In the argument section of the brief,
the content of each of the dependent claims before us is
2 We find that the arguments advanced in the main and reply
briefs lack conformance with 37 CFR § 1.192(c)(8)(iii) and (iv).
For example, the arguments advanced do not comply with the
requirement that specific limitations in the claims should be
referenced which are not described in the prior art relied upon
in the rejection.
3
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007