Appeal No. 1998-1472 Page 24
Application No. 08/427,721
Applied Digital Data Sys, Inc., 730 F.2d 1440, 1446, 221 USPQ
385, 390 (Fed. Cir. 1984).
Here, as mentioned regarding the anticipation of claims
142, 143, 151, 152, 166, and 168, we are persuaded that Takeda
anticipates the invention of representative claim 151.
Accordingly, the claim is ipso facto obvious over Takeda alone
or in combination with other references. Any teachings of
Bjorklund, Murakami, or Hugle regarding the limitation are
merely cumulative. Therefore, we affirm the rejection of
claims 142, 143, 151, 152, 166, 168, and 171 under 35 U.S.C. §
103(a) as obvious over Bjorklund in view of Takeda.
We emphasize that our affirmances are based only on the
arguments made in the briefs. Arguments not made therein are
not before us, are not at issue, and are considered waived.
Next, we address the nonobviousness of claims 144 and 153.
Nonobviousness of Claims 144 and 153
The appellants argue, “the combined teaching of
Bjorklund, Takeda, and Murakami also lack any teaching or
Page: Previous 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007