Appeal No. 1998-0622
Application No. 08/360,972
facie case
with argument and/or evidence. Obviousness is then determined
on the basis of the evidence as a whole and the relative
persuasiveness of the arguments. See In re Oetiker, 977 F.2d
1443, 1445, 24 USPQ2d 1443, 1444 (Fed. Cir. 1992); In re
Hedges, 783 F.2d 1038, 1039, 228 USPQ 685, 686 (Fed. Cir.
1986); In re Piasecki, 745 F.2d 1468, 1472, 223 USPQ 785, 788
(Fed. Cir. 1984); and In re Rinehart, 531 F.2d 1048, 1052, 189
USPQ 143, 147 (CCPA 1976). We are further guided by the
precedent of our
reviewing court that the limitations from the disclosure are
not
to be imported into the claims. In re Lundberg, 244 F.2d 543,
113 USPQ 530 (CCPA 1957); In re Queener, 796 F.2d 461, 230
USPQ 438
(Fed. Cir. 1986). We also note that the arguments not made
separately for any individual claim or claims are considered
waived. See 37 CFR § 1.192(a) and (c); In re Baxter Travenol
6
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007