Appeal No. 1996-4124
Application No. 08/307,088
37 CFR § 1.192(a) as amended at 60 FR § 14518 (March 17,
1995), which was controlling at the time of Appellant filing
the brief, states as follows:
The brief ... must set forth the authorities and
arguments on which the appellant will rely to
maintain the appeal. Any arguments or authorities
not included in the brief may be refused
consideration by the Board of Patent Appeals and
Interferences.
Also, 37 CFR § 1.192(c)(8)(iv) states:
For each rejection under 35 U.S.C. § 103, the
argument shall specify the errors in the rejection
and, if appropriate, the specific limitations in the
rejected claims which are not described in the prior
art relied on in the rejection, and shall explain
how such limitations render the claimed subject
matter unobvious over the prior art. If the
rejection is based upon a combination of references,
the argument shall explain why the references, taken
as a whole, do not suggest the claimed subject
matter, and shall include, as may be appropriate, an
explanation of why features disclosed in one
reference may not properly be combined with features
disclosed in another reference. A general argument
that all the limitations are not described in a
single reference does not satisfy the requirements
of this paragraph.
Thus, 37 CFR § 1.192 provides that just as the court is not
under any burden to raise and/or consider such issues, this
board is also not under any greater burden. For the forging
21
Page: Previous 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007