Appeal No. 1997-1117
Application No. 08/300,703
rationale in support of the rejections and arguments in
rebuttal set forth in the Examiner’s Answer.
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 have suggested to one of ordinary
skill in the art the obviousness of the invention as set forth
in claims 1-9, 12, 15-29, 32, 33, and 35-37. We reach the
opposite conclusion with respect to claims 30 and 31.
Accordingly, we affirm-in-part.
Appellant has indicated (Brief, page 4) that, for the
purposes of this appeal, the claims will stand or fall
together in the following groups: Group I (claims 1-9, 12, and
15-26), Group II (claims 27-29 and 32), Group III (claims 30
and 31), Group IV (claims 33, 35, and 36) and Group V (Claim
37). Consistent with this indication, Appellant has made no
separate arguments with respect to any of the claims within
each group. Accordingly, we will consider the claims
separately only to the extent that separate arguments are of
record in this appeal. Dependent claims 2-9, 12, 15-26, 28,
29, 32, 35, and 36 have not been argued separately and,
accordingly, will stand or fall with their base claim.
5
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007