Appeal No. 1998-3128 Page 7
Application No. 08/624,874
1986); In re Sernaker, 702 F.2d 989, 991, 217 USPQ 1, 3 (Fed.
Cir. 1983).
Here, the appellant concedes, "[c]laims 1-3 and 6-8 stand
or fall together." (Appeal Br. at 7.) Therefore, the claims
stand or fall together in a group. We select claim 1 to
represent the group. With this representation in mind, we
address the appellant's two arguments regarding claims 1-3 and
6-8.
First, he argues, "Austin teaches a totally different
nomenclature from the present invention." (Appeal Br. at 11.)
The reference belies the argument. More specifically,
Figure 1 of Austin shows the claimed "central computer" as an
intermediate computer or as an intermediate computer and a
host computer. The Figure further shows the claimed
"plurality of CNC machine controllers" as multiple machine
control units (MCUs). In addition, Figure 1 depicts the
claimed "transfer means" as a bus connecting the computers to
the MCUs. The bus enables transferring information
therebetween. Specifically, "the computer ... is used to
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007