Appeal No. 1998-1393 Page 5
Application No. 08/498,306
Grouping of the Claims
37 C.F.R. § 1.192(c)(7), as amended at 60 Fed. Reg. 14518
(Mar. 17, 1995), was controlling when the appeal brief was
filed. Section 1.192(c)(7) stated as follows.
For each ground of rejection which appellant
contests and which applies to a group of two or more
claims, the Board shall select a single claim from
the group and shall decide the appeal as to the
ground of rejection on the basis of that claim alone
unless a statement is included that the claims of
the group do not stand or fall together and, in the
argument under paragraph (c)(8) of this section,
appellant explains why the claims of the group are
believed to be separately patentable. Merely
pointing out differences in what the claims cover is
not an argument as to why the claims are separately
patentable.
In addition, claims that are not argued separately stand or
fall together. In re Kaslow, 707 F.2d 1366, 1376, 217 USPQ
1089, 1096 (Fed. Cir. 1983).
The appellant states that claims 4 and 11 stand or fall
together for the appeal. (Appeal Br. at 3.) Conversely, the
appellant omits a statement that claims 4 and 11 do not stand
or fall together and reasons why the claims are separately
patentable. Therefore, we consider the claims to stand or
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007