Appeal No. 1996-3367 Page 4
Application No. 08/480,554
Appellants state that the claims do not stand or fall
together and furnishes the following groups:
I) claims 1, 3, 4, 5, 9 and 10; II) claim 2; III) claim 6; IV)
claim 7; and V) claim 8 (brief, page 4). Appellants have2
only furnished separate substantive arguments for claims that
are members of separate groupings of claims as identified by
appellants, not for any separate claims that are members of
the same grouping. We therefore limit our discussion to one
claim in each group identified by appellant, i.e., claims 1,
2, 6, 7 and 8. See In re Ochiai, 71 F.3d 1565, 1566 n.2, 37
USPQ2d 1127, 1129 n.2 (Fed. Cir. 1995); 37 CFR § 1.192(c)(7)
and (c)(8)(1995).
Rejection of Claims 1, 3, 4, 5, 9 and 10
As correctly noted by the examiner (answer, pages 3 and
4), Böttger discloses and exemplifies a method of preparing
1,2-dichloroethane by reacting ethylene with chlorine in the
presence of a catalyst including iron chloride and sodium
2Since claim 13 depends from claim 8 (Group V) and
appellants have not identified a separate grouping of claims
to which claim 13 belongs, we consider claim 13 as a member of
appellants' Group V claims for purposes of this appeal.
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007