Appeal No. 1998-0662
Application No. 08/561,223
The brief . . . must set forth the authorities and
arguments on which appellant will rely to maintain
the appeal. Any arguments or authorities not
included in the brief will be refused consideration
by the Board of [P]atent Appeals and Interferences,
unless good cause is shown.
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.
In view of the foregoing, the decision of the Examiner
rejecting claims 1, 4, 7, 8, 9, 11, 15, 17, 18 and 20 under
11
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007