Appeal No. 1999-1551 Application No. 08/547,736 claims are patentable at least for the reason that they depend from claim 14 or that “it is not seen where the examiner’s proposed combination of prior art either expressly teaches or suggests this subject matter for a handset for a digital cordless radio telephone system.” These are not considered “arguments” as to the specific merits of the dependent claims but, rather, a wordy statement tantamount to appellants’ letting the dependent claims stand or fall with the independent claim from which they depend. Accordingly, in view of appellants’ lack of substantive argument regarding claims 15 and 16, the rejection of these claims under 35 U.S.C. § 103 is sustained as the claims will fall with independent claim 14. Claim 10 recites that a data link control link between the base station and the at least one handset is unnecessary for the base station communication means to transmit the page request signal. The examiner contends [Paper No. 4-page 6] that Barnes discloses a base station in which a data link control link between the base station and the handset is unnecessary for the base station to transmit the signal analogous to an {LCE- PAGE-REQUEST}, citing Figure 5 and column 2, lines 24-31 of Barnes. Appellants argue [principal brief-page 14] that the cited portion of Barnes does not describe a mechanism analogous to an {LCE-PAGE-REQUEST} and, in fact, refers to the use of subaudio band signalling. 17Page: Previous 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 NextLast modified: November 3, 2007