Appeal No. 1998-0818
Application No. 08/319,143
37 CFR § 1.192(a) as amended at 60 Fed. Reg. § 14518 (March
17, 1995), which was controlling at the time of Appellants'
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)(iii) states:
For each rejection under 35 U.S.C. § 102, the
argument shall specify the errors in the rejection
and why the rejected claims are patentable under 35
U.S.C. § 102, including any specific limitations in
the rejected claims which are not described in the
prior art relied upon in the rejection.
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 foregoing
reasons, we sustain the Examiner’s rejection of claim 13 under
35 U.S.C.
§ 102.
We next consider the rejection of claims 3, 4, 6, 7, 11,
12 and 14 under 35 U.S.C. § 103. It is the burden of the
Examiner to establish why one having ordinary skill in the art
12
Page: Previous 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007